Should military service (or related service) be required?

[Pensalum]

There should be absolutely no conscription, period. It's wrong and a violation of my rights as a human to be forced to fight in, or support a war through noncombatant roles.

I'd be willing to do Peace Corps or some other kind of aid, but only if I wasn't required to.

[Regnum Dominae]

I'm not, I should be free to retire when I want, not have to give up two years of it because someone felt like forcing me to participate in national service.

It isn't all about you. You're a part of a civil society.

And there are many other ways for a person to contrivute to civil society than by enslaving them to one aspect of it for two years.

[Vetalia]

It isn't all about you. You're a part of a civil society.

Sure, but that doesn't mean civil society should be able to trample over my rights and freedom whenever it wants. In fact, that very freedom is a fundamental pillar of American civil society.

[Jetan]

There should be absolutely no conscription, period. It's wrong and a violation of my rights as a human to be forced to fight in, or support a war through noncombatant roles.

No it's not. There is no right not to be conscripted, and there never should be either.

[United Marxist Nations]

It would depend on a lot of things. For example, in a socialist state, service probably would be required, but probably in more of a rotation; the reason for this would be that, ideally in a socialist state the army would be the armed proletariat.

EDIT: Unless there were a great crisis, you could probably always opt for an alternative position if you object on conscientious grounds.

[Priory Academy USSR]

Do you know what would be even free-er? Letting people choose their own career path and become productive members of society on their own.

Since when is the goal maximum freedom?

Becoming a free society has always been a goal of for Western nations: be it through freedom of speech and other negative rights, or the freedom to have a successful life through positive rights. Freedom has, and always will be something to aim for.

[Xirtam]

On one hand I think the idea of forcing people to support such a violent and unmerciful institution is a disgrace.

There is nothing disgraceful about defending your nation/the nation defending itself.

Western foreign policy today is anything but defence.

[Post-Keynesian Economics]

You lose two years of retirement, as a practical matter. And I'm okay with that, seeing as people's retirement years are becoming more and more disproportionate to how long people are living.

So you want to artificially reduce quality of life in an attempt to further an oppressive moralistic goal?

Funny you mention that, I actually woke up this morning and said to myself, "today I'm going to get on NSG and suggest that we artificially reduce quality of life in an attempt to further an oppressive moralistic goal. Delicious. And it'll bother Regnum Dominae too."

Okay, so not really. In all seriousness, if it can somehow be construed as reducing quality of life (and for a whole two years!) I still maintain that the benefits (such as saving lives and creating a sense of civic responsibility) would make it worth it.

[Regnum Dominae]

Do you know what would be even free-er? Letting people choose their own career path and become productive members of society on their own.

Since when is the goal maximum freedom?

What is the point of creating a "better society" when there is no freedom?

[DogDoo 7]

yeah, because instilling an entire population with PTSD makes perfect sense as a society.

[Post-Keynesian Economics]

Since when is the goal maximum freedom?

Becoming a free society has always been a goal of for Western nations: be it through freedom of speech and other negative rights, or the freedom to have a successful life through positive rights. Freedom has, and always will be something to aim for.

Well, if I can take away freedom of individuals for a whole two years and improve societal average quality of life as a result, I'm okay with that even if it goes against Western mantras.

[Florys]

Absolutly not, as a soldier I would hate having some moody teen

[United Marxist Nations]

yeah, because instilling an entire population with PTSD makes perfect sense as a society.

>Implying that military service automatically means combat.

[Pensalum]

There should be absolutely no conscription, period. It's wrong and a violation of my rights as a human to be forced to fight in, or support a war through noncombatant roles.

No it's not. There is no right not to be conscripted, and there never should be either.

No one should be forced to join military service for any reason. It's basically slavery, anybody should be allowed to choose not to take part in military service if they don't agree with it, or even if they just don't want to.

[Post-Keynesian Economics]

Since when is the goal maximum freedom?

What is the point of creating a "better society" when there is no freedom?

This isn't "Brave New World" or "1984." There's still lots of freedom. We're talking about two years maximum here.

[Post-Keynesian Economics]

No it's not. There is no right not to be conscripted, and there never should be either.

No one should be forced to join military service for any reason. It's basically slavery, anybody should be allowed to choose not to take part in military service if they don't agree with it, or even if they just don't want to.

That's why there are alternatives.

[Jetan]

There is nothing disgraceful about defending your nation/the nation defending itself.

Western foreign policy today is anything but defence.

Tell me, which wars of aggression have for example Finland or Austria taken part of? Both are western, both have conscription. Your claim is hogwash.

[Australian rePublic]

No. I am against conscription, and anybody who is pro conscription and has never served (with the exception of a legitimate reason) is a hypocrite

[Regnum Dominae]

Western foreign policy today is anything but defence.

Tell me, which wars of aggression have for example Finland or Austria taken part of? Both are western, both have conscription. Your claim is hogwash.

Not all of us live in Austria or Finland.

[Novia Soviet Socialist Republic]

Absolutly not, as a soldier I would hate having some moody teen

I don't think it would be a moody teen more of a scared rookie.

[Pindian Republic]

Becoming a free society has always been a goal of for Western nations: be it through freedom of speech and other negative rights, or the freedom to have a successful life through positive rights. Freedom has, and always will be something to aim for.

Well, if I can take away freedom of individuals for a whole two years and improve societal average quality of life as a result, I'm okay with that even if it goes against Western mantras.

And how exactly would mandatory military service improve the average quality of life?

[Fralinia]

I thought we were in the 21st century, apparently not.

Some nations are small, and require conscription during peacetime to maintain basic defense forces. The United States is not one of them. We'd need a lot less soldiers anyway if we stopped invading everyone who looks at us funny, and now you want to enable our government to play cops and robbers on an international scale by flooding the Army with young people who only showed up to avoid being arrested? I think not.

[Wisconsin9]

yeah, because instilling an entire population with PTSD makes perfect sense as a society.

Not to mention giving them all military training and hatred of the government.

[United Marxist Nations]

Western foreign policy today is anything but defence.

Tell me, which wars of aggression have for example Finland or Austria taken part of? Both are western, both have conscription. Your claim is hogwash.

Austria: World War I.

Finland: Joined the Axis in WWII (although revenge played a part, it was still a war of aggression).

[Post-Keynesian Economics]

It isn't all about you. You're a part of a civil society.

And there are many other ways for a person to contrivute to civil society than by enslaving them to one aspect of it for two years.

I agree. But you can do the mandatory service and whatever other contribution you're going to make to society afterwards.