6 ms·

Conscription. If you want to incentivize military service then make it mandatory and many of the best candidates will enlist in exchange for some influence ove

Conscription. If you want to incentivize military service then make it mandatory and many of the best candidates will enlist in exchange for some influence over their military occupation. If the worker shortage persists, and all indications are it will, this is a probable outcome. To @downrightmike who thought the Pat Tillman tragedy was worthy of mention in such a disrespectful way, the guy's sacrifice is awe inspiring regardless & your spin on what happened is inaccurate.

chrisseaton 4y ago
The military doesn't want conscription. They want people who want to be there.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > The military doesn't want conscription. The political leadership doesn't want conscription because it makes the public care a lot more about decisions to use the military.
JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> the worker shortage persists, and all indications are it will, this is a probable outcome Conscription would be political suicide. The better bet is on more automation to better leverage a thinner spread of recruits.
- version_five 4y ago
  This is one of those "Peak NH" comments, no offense meant. Conscription may be politically unpopular, but pretending that automation will be a solution to declining army enlistment anytime soon is pretty out of touch with reality
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > Conscription may be politically unpopular, but pretending that automation will be a solution to declining army enlistment anytime soon is pretty out of touch with reality Sorry, not saying automation is the solution. If China bombs Guam, yes, we'll need conscription. But conscription is far from "probable." I'm simply arguing that Congress pumping godawful quantities of money into automation is more likely than POTUS enacting a draft.
omegaham 4y ago
Conscription would spur an immediate and vehement backlash against the military. But more importantly, there is no actual shortage of potential recruits. There is a shortage of recruits who meet the current military standards. You can very easily lower your standards and get more recruits from the pool that is currently disqualified for medical issues, criminal record, and general stupidity (that is, more stupid than the military currently is). The reason why this isn't currently done is that the military doesn't need the bodies that badly, certainly not badly enough to justify the increased expense and frustration of increased shitbaggery. The recruiting budget is huge, and I'm sure that the military is happy to mull this over in hopes of getting more high-quality candidates. If it doesn't work, they'll try something else.
version_five 4y ago
I agree that we should have mandatory military service. There is almost no downside and a lot of potential, both for the country and for the people. It would also be a great way to actually promote equality amongst people
- WarChortle18 4y ago
  No downside, except for you know dying or being maimed. True we aren't in a war atm. But given how Russia is acting it's not unlikely we might be at some point.
rascul 4y ago
Conscription is slavery.

chrisseaton 4y ago

The military doesn't want conscription. They want people who want to be there.

dragonwriter 4y ago
> The military doesn't want conscription. The political leadership doesn't want conscription because it makes the public care a lot more about decisions to use the military.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> the worker shortage persists, and all indications are it will, this is a probable outcome Conscription would be political suicide. The better bet is on more automation to better leverage a thinner spread of recruits.

version_five 4y ago
This is one of those "Peak NH" comments, no offense meant. Conscription may be politically unpopular, but pretending that automation will be a solution to declining army enlistment anytime soon is pretty out of touch with reality
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > Conscription may be politically unpopular, but pretending that automation will be a solution to declining army enlistment anytime soon is pretty out of touch with reality Sorry, not saying automation is the solution. If China bombs Guam, yes, we'll need conscription. But conscription is far from "probable." I'm simply arguing that Congress pumping godawful quantities of money into automation is more likely than POTUS enacting a draft.

omegaham 4y ago

Conscription would spur an immediate and vehement backlash against the military. But more importantly, there is no actual shortage of potential recruits. There is a shortage of recruits who meet the current military standards. You can very easily lower your standards and get more recruits from the pool that is currently disqualified for medical issues, criminal record, and general stupidity (that is, more stupid than the military currently is). The reason why this isn't currently done is that the military doesn't need the bodies that badly, certainly not badly enough to justify the increased expense and frustration of increased shitbaggery. The recruiting budget is huge, and I'm sure that the military is happy to mull this over in hopes of getting more high-quality candidates. If it doesn't work, they'll try something else.

version_five 4y ago

I agree that we should have mandatory military service. There is almost no downside and a lot of potential, both for the country and for the people. It would also be a great way to actually promote equality amongst people

WarChortle18 4y ago
No downside, except for you know dying or being maimed. True we aren't in a war atm. But given how Russia is acting it's not unlikely we might be at some point.

rascul 4y ago

Conscription is slavery.