The pros and cons of required military assistance

Worldwide there are countries debating if they should enforce a Mandatory Army Service for citizens who are at least 18 years of age. This could affect the countries in two different methods. It could strengthen the country, or perhaps it could damage it. Fit, which in the two can be described as more visible outcome?

Pro Argument one particular

A mandatory military service means that a nation is prepared for the worst. In the event, say, a war did break out, it could mean that they would not have to invest as much time recruiting mainly because they would already have trained military there, allowing them to have a head start inside the battle aspect of warfare.

It would likewise mean that they might never have a shortage of soldiers. There are quite often in warfare, where voluntary sign up to the army has proven hard to rely on and that the patriotic surge with the beginnings generally runs out within a year. “Conscription during peacetime means that the region was well prepared for emergencies (‘Dabatepedia’, dbp.

idebate. org, ‘Debate: Necessary Military Service’). Having this kind of constant renewal of troops would definitely give the country a plus.

Con Argument 1

A plus in warfare is all very well and great, but the need to join the army against their will certainly, even for any small amount of time, may cause bad perceptions towards authority in the younger generation. This can lead them to be unwilling to learn new skills and to develop character, which are two things which can be supposed to seen as perks towards the service. The debatepedia web page says: “If young people have to go in the armed forces ¦. it will promote resentment against authority.

Pro Argument a couple of

The incentives of necessary military service could definitely appeal to youngpeople who happen to be recent college leavers. There are numerous cases of people who leave university and are unsure of what to do from then on, but the military services provides a short-term place to go while still with this period of insecurity and can be seen as a sort of conserve haven for people in this situation. It would as well lessen some of society’s problems, such as teenage pregnancy and crime rates. “Would you like to find crime, adolescent pregnancy and substance abuse prices decline? ¦ this is a spat for mandatory military service (Armstrong Williams, “Mandatory Army Service Would Benefit the US, Information Max. Summer 19th 2006).

Cons Disagreement 2

Although the Military can prove to be a place to look for those in need, it can be argued that forcing youth into services deprives all of them of their ‘freedom of choice’ (debate. org, “should army service be mandatory? ). This starvation is, naturally , a deprivation of a man right, making mandatory military service immoral.

Conclusion

To conclude, Mandatory Army Service can both benefit a country and hinder that. The outcome from the system, good or bad, depends on the way the individual country carries it out. For example , the typical conscription may mean a respectful country with low crime rates, or maybe a rebellious country, with bad thoughts on authority figures. Overall, Mandatory Armed forces Service can be neither good nor negative.

Meagan Ewing, 533 words and phrases

Bibliography

http://dbp.idebate.org/en/index.php/Debate:Mandatorymilitaryservice

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070524055150AAMMxYE

http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-military-service-be-mandatory

You may also be considering the following: pros and cons of armed forces school

1

Tweet