should the US require 2 year compulsory military

REDNECK HIPPIE wrote:

I believe the US should have compulsory 2 year military service as an enlisted person in the Army, navy, Air Force or Marines, regardless of race, creed, religious preference, gender, sexual preference, physical ability, social status or education level. The only three exceptions would be for those convicted as adults of a violent felony, those judged by a panel of experts to be mentally handicapped and those who need full time help from someone to exist. At the age of 18 or graduation from high school, you would be given your choice of the military branch to enter. You could enter at 17 with a parent or legal guardian signature. Emancipated minors could sign themselves up at 17. Those with physical handicaps would take on the jobs currently held by more able-bodied service members. This would free them up to perform other tasks. After 2 years, if a person wished to make the military a career and become an officer they could apply for the appropriate officer school. If a woman became pregnant during here 2 year hitch, this would extend her time by 6 months. If a person wished to pursue a career that was compatible with the militaries needs, they could do so with the governments assistance, this would also extend their enlistment time.

WOLF DEN wrote:

<quoted text>
Sorry sweetie you live by some of the biggest makers of weapons and nukes what the hell you talking about? You are probably one of those who works for one of those companies,well if you even have a job, LOL!
Ever heard of Halliburton, they got lots there, what you talking about all the war folks are in Texas, give me a fricking break!

Pappa wrote:

<quoted text>
Excellent Heinlein book. Too bad the movie sucked and wasn't even close to following the book, but yes that is where I got the idea. I feel participation in the running of the country should be earned by more than just being born.

jahjam wrote:

<quoted text>
NorCal, thanks to you. I may have to let this go as a generation gap thing. I was Vietnam era, didn't go overseas though. Speaking only from personal experience, in the early 70's, so many enlistees were there instead of jail, that our first sergeant,my "office job" CO, and others, stated openly they preferred draftees as troops. Not that there were no talented enlistees, just that a lot of talented draftees didn't seem to mind making the best of their job. How negative can people be about a 2 year obligation, that includes training and benefits? Anyway, I understand your opinion on those that just don't want to participate in our society, I know they're out there. Best to you...

saviorself wrote:

<quoted text>
except that our founding fathers SAID citizenship is a birthright as well. I love America. I love everything ABOUT it. I would NEVER take that away from another person. It means too much to me.

Pappa wrote:

<quoted text>
Citizenship is not the same as the right to vote.

saviorself wrote:

<quoted text>
Au Contrair'... citizenship and the right to vote are DIRECTLY CORRELATED in the Constituion of the United States. ONLY the commision of a felony act can change this, not even infirmity or age can do so.

white squigly wurms wrote:

<quoted text>I am talking about we whom are not in the military, and years I served in the seventies(all volunteer) should still have a right to a voice in united states politics wether they serve or not.
Some suggest that it should be every citizens duty to serve this country,yet no natural born citizen choose to be born here and you would take the choice to particpate away for a mandatory patriotic duty.If it is mandatory it is not patriotic it is a mandate of service.
And you are certainly right about this being right in the heart of the weapons industry,not only do I live very near fort hood but some of my duties include servicing not only the base but the weapons manufacters.
Every citizens are not created equal some are mentally ill, some are handicaped ,some are homsexuals or lesbians,these people cannat do the same job as other so called normal citizens because of taught hatred and religous demogogary,or stymitation.
you would throw all citizens in the same service yet in society they are seperated by a number of degrees of social caste,try to get married outside of the accepted age group or marriy someone of the same sex , you will not recieve fair and equal treatment under the law . you will recieve prejudice religous and social castagation,
My point is that even these social mifits should have equal right under the laws of this country regardless of there beliefs or natural proclivities or military status, the tax man will not take these natural proclivities or lack of military service into account when taking there money.In effect by paying taxes and being informed they have already earned the right to vote and voice there opinion regardless of military service or lack there of.
and as far as me believing that nuclear weapons are madness is indisputable.

Pappa wrote:

<quoted text>
Wrong, there is no constitutional right to vote in a presidential election. The only provision to to prevent the individual states from discriminating based on race, sex, etc. Maybe you should have paid attention in civics class.

WOLF DEN wrote:

<quoted text>
AGREE! BTW my son is in IRAQ serving right now, and I miss him too. But I do think kids today, they need to pull their heads out of the ass's including my own kids and realize FREEDOM comes with a cost. They just piss me off sometimes.

saviorself wrote:

<quoted text>
You've been watching too much sci-fi, though I love it too. The right of citizens to vote cannot be infringed on any basis anymore. Rights that are not SPECIFICALLY defined by the Constituion are reserved for definition by the States. As for not having an "official endorsement" from the Constituion for voting in a Presidential election, technically you are correct. You have ONLY the right to cast a vote for an ELECTOR.(same thing with our electoral process and the way the office ITSELF is established.) To pretend OTHERWISE is about as silly as trying to pretend that the United States is technically under Maritime law or that you can negate your legal criminal trial due to fringed flag in your courtroom.

saviorself wrote:

<quoted text>
oh, sure you could. You might look like the sweetheart-type, but everything in life is a matter of perspective. Make no mistake about it... if your average cow had the chance to kill me and you and everyone we love, he'd do it without hesitation.

WOLF DEN wrote:

<quoted text>
Dani- If you were hungry or your kids needed to eat, you would have no problem pulling the trigger...believe me. You eat what you kill.

DaniGirl123 wrote:

<quoted text>
That's why I said..."But I COULD if my life depended on it."

Pappa wrote:

<quoted text>
Please reference the section of the constitution that guarantees your right to vote. Citizenship does not guarantee the right to vote. The constitution does not prevent the states from suspending a felon's voting "priviledge" though.

DaniGirl123 wrote:

<quoted text>
lol, that would be a sight!:)

saviorself wrote:

<quoted text>
articless 12,14,15,17,19 and 23

saviorself wrote:

<quoted text>
the cattle will one day rise up. People burgers will be all the rage. As soon as they develope opposable hoofs.

DaniGirl123 wrote:

<quoted text>
hahah, thank you for all the laughs!