USA Image problem?

Roel,as far i know,Janissares was elite turkish soldiers,trained for combat and discipline from day 1.Readed some stories,that chieldren was trained like beasts,enocuraged on fights and killing ewery day.
Here is wan interested historical data: In 1389. on Kosovo field,Serbian and Turkish army had great battle,biggest in Serbian history.Bosnian king helped Serbia in that battle with aprox 1/3 total christian soldiers.(bosnia was purely christian country).THat morning on "Vidovdan" Great Serbian religius day,battle begun.Christian army was outnumbered a bit,and in battle,Turskish Sultan Murat died,killed by Serbian Knight Milos Obilic,and Serbian Duke was captured and killed.In great battle,there was no winner.
Net much b4 Kosovo battle,Turkey invades southern Serban lands,today known as Macedonia,defeating Brother Mrnjavcevic,in "Battle on marica" without any extend data about that battle.

After short interductions,here is point.Serbia was invaded 18y after kosovo battle,not long after that bosnia allso.Why 18y after? Nearly all army capable males died on kosovo battle,and Turks gatther new army,mainly from Janissares,from Southern Serbian lands.Bosnian fate was,that when they capture Bosnian royal family,smal chieldrens was trasfered to Islam,and their names was changed in muslim names.I can write alot more about this,it is whole medieval history,but it is alot offtopic.

 

our all volunteer military works ok for light duty wars like iraq 1 and 2 but it wouldnt hack it in any real war crisis ,ie ww2,korea ,viet nam ...i think the notion that a countrys 18 to 23 year olds should have the final vote on wether that country is worth fighting for or not is kinda flawed ...most american men of that age know about as much about world events ,history and the difference between democracy and totalitarianism as a pig knows about sunday...

 

Perhaps, but who says the military should only consist of 18 to 23 year olds? If something is worth fighting for then those over 23 will have to share the load as well. Besides, people who are between the ages of 18 and 23 shouldn't have to give up the right to determine the direction of their own life and sacrifice liberty merely because they are young and healthy and thus prime candidates for soldiers.
I see that kind of paternalistic attitude of "we older people know what is best, now do as we say" as wrong in the extreme. Your statement about knowledge of such issues could be applied just as well to the average citizen regardless of age IMO. If they don't know these things by the time they are in their teens who is to blame, do you think? Who failed to teach the youth what they should know? They are to blame because they didn't bring themselves up in a way that we would approve of?
Better stick that thumb out when pointing that finger at young people.

 

now grieg , you know as well as i that is not a matter of us old farts arbitrarily sending hapless poor young men to fight ...all countrys and peoples the world over from time immorial have always sent their young men , not women not children not old people , this is not just a coincidence...old guys 40 ,50 60 can serve in static lines as volkstrum (sgt shmidt will now instruct you in the fireing of the panzerfaust...) when times are really desperate ...but when it comes to humpin 90 lbs of gear through 20 miles of rice paddys , then sleeping in a muddy ditch , you need young pups ......age dosnt always bring wisdom but it mostly does (think back to your own mind when you were 20...) as to the education of american youth , dont get me started ,if i was in charge i would rip us public education a new one...my own boys of course are faily well polished in history ,sociology ,geography and current events ...as im sure yours are ,grieg

 

TISO: sorry, I'm going to leave this topic intact because I honestly don't have a clue where to begin the splitting. I apologize for posting off-topic in here in reply to Sinissa.

On the topic of conscription versus a volunteer army, I think conscription is only justified when a country is truly in danger - that is, when it's actually being attacked by another nation's army. In such a situation the amount of people who are prepared to disrupt their own course of life by joining the army voluntarily will be too few even if they are thorougly schooled in blind patriotism. When no imminent threat exists, it should be the choice of the people whether or not they want to join their country's army, and the consequences of their choice are entirely their responsibility, be it for better or worse. In other words, leave it to those "unwise" 18- to 23-year-olds.

Now, isn't that a more or less balanced opinion for an 18-year-old, Majorwoody?

 

roel, i always read your opinions with keen intrest ,the fact tthat you are 18 makes you something of a phenominon imo...when i was 18 in 1974 i registered for the draft as was required but i knew i was in the clear as far as viet nam was concerned by then ,unlike the boys 5 or 6 years my senior....there is something called peace through strength which applies at the school yard as well as in war time, sweden and switzerland avoided wars one and two but remained well armed while neutral ...in the usa because of geography we can be somewhat casual about the size of our military...where tiso and sinissa live one would be rather naive to suppose they could begin conscrition and training AFTER they are being invaded...the netherlands is not likely to face invasion any time soon (thanks to the big stick uncle sam held behind his back while he squinted hopefully at the economic house of cards that supported the warsaw pact for 60 years ) roel our countries can afford to let our young men smoke blunts and bird dog beaver all week but i still think a universal short military basic training or job corps type commitment would be benificial to the country and to the young men as well..lord knows a lot of them could do with a little molding and shapeing..

 

Well,for once,me and Woody agreed on something!

YEs,a little bit of trainning would probably help the American society a bit better on maturity and stuff..Most Asians think that Western youths are generally immature and soft.For me,i don't have sufficient contact with them to have a say.

But the two years of military service for me was very enjoyable.I grew to become a man.i learnt to be responsible.And i learnt about camaradie.I think these are lessons every youth needs to go through to grow .

 

yes ,kaiser...skinny kids get meat on their bones .fat boys get slimmed down ,whats more important imo ,is the benifit to society when some ill raised boys are given a new perspective on their own importance and value to the world (WHICH IS ZIP,LOL ) the military breaks their egos into little peices and then rebuilds them into more respectable and usefull members of society....this of course sounds cliche and it is ,but teamship ,hardship ,bonding ,leadership ,respect for authority and self confidence are things worth learning ...and sadly for many of americas kids raised in broken homes in busted neihborhoods ,its the only real schooling they may ever get....basic training dosent work on everyone , of course ,but then ...what does?

 

This is historical occasion i acctualy agree with Woody (on both of his last posts)

 

But is it up to the government to force children into a militaristic environment in order to "shape" them as citizens? I'm certainly in favour of the idea of military training as a way of punishing unruly children, anarchists and vandals, but only as punishment, for those who have forfeited the right to be protected by society by rejecting it. Beyond that, military service really ought to be a free man's choice. (and strangely I'm in agreement with Grieg here, I thought it would never come to be...)

 

Me too...

There are lots of ways to turn boys into men short of compulsory military conscription

Ahh, freedom :smok:

 

On the other hand compulsory service in military and reserves makes much more difficoult to start war for dubious reasons (especcialy in a democratic country). If anyone is eligable to go to war as military reservist you can be shure that population will take much more keen interest in politics, especcialy in cases where war could become an issue. If somene else id doing the fighting (like US military in Iraq) it is all well to suport the troops, but nothing close of being in position that you could be eventualy shipped there. If US would have a draft you can be shure that current occupant of the white house would not be Bush II.

 

And Yet for some strange reasons Singaporeans are among the most apathetic when it comes to politics...lol....

Anyway,i don't think that there is a way that is "nice" and yet tough to teach youths.Of course going through BMT isn't always fun for many,but for grandfather,myfather and my sons that will come,this is something we all go through and even though we may not like it,it is only during trainning that we come to mature and grow up.

I mean,maybe the reason why Roel and Smeg do not agree with it is because both of you can't comprehend this idea of shaving your head and being pumped.lol.But seriously,no one relishes the idea but as the Chinese saying goes,"the bitter medicine benefits the body"

 

Look, I hate mtv as much as the next guy And as nice as it would be to send all us kiddies off to boot camp... Some countries really don't need it... Conscription can be a bad thing, for several reasons...

- Its expensive (for the government)

- It takes young strong men out of the workforce

- You often conscript more unfit men than fit

- You often get alot of 'bullying' in conscript armies (see Greece; Russia)

Unless you are in constant danger of being invaded, why bother? Its common knowlege that conscription has a economically detrimental effect on a society... A country which conscripts takes men out of the workforce , losing prospective productivity... Pays em, clothes them, feeds them, trains them, buys them guns, all to keep fit 'in case' there is a war... Usually there isn't and the government has just lost a fat lot of money and productivity... For 'safe' countries like America and Australia conscription is a silly idea... Singapore, on the other hand, needs it (and has done a fine job might I add)

 

And if i might add,Singapore's economy has been growing and our workforce is one of the most competitive in the region.

But of course,i agree with you that for all its benefits,America and Britain doesn't need it.As for whether there's a need for Australia,that's very debatable.

I'm more for Roel's suggestion that delinquent youthsa go for military service.But that would raise up another problem...delinquents mixing with delinquents doesn't necessarily means reformed youths.
Youth homes and jails hasn't realy made our streets clean and safe right?(ok,Singapore's is)

 

Bad idea IMO... Taking criminal youths and making them fitter, teaching them stealth, camouflage, combat, aggression and team work. OK, some will respond to the discipline and change their ways, for others on the other hand you're giving them all the tools they need to be better criminals.

 

This theory makes no sense. The same population that allows conscription, like sheep, to force them into compulsory service is going to rise up and throw out their President.
Some of the strongest supporters of Bush are in the military forces that are doing the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, many of them reservists or National Guard.

 

Look at this from the other side. You install discipline, obidience, teamwork, patience... into them. From employers point of view this is a very good thing.

And proffesional army isn't? We are yust finding out that professional army can be even more expenssive that conscripts.

Right and that can't possibly happen in professional army? This is a problem of discipline and messed up officer, NCO, soldier relations. Certain hirearcy will be always present among ordinary soldiers. Ussualy it is based on seniority (older (in service) soldier - đomba (sinnisa will uderstand this term) has automatic seniority over newbie -gušter (lizard)), how it is implemented is matter of dicipline. If NCO's and officers are acting proffesional this will be transformed into something good (and will be used only as joke) if not you get bullying. My unit was crewd by men with same number of days (we were pulled into the army in time frame of few days) and we had no such problems. We did have few older soldiers as corporals but they did not use bullying (after all they did have to live with us ).

I don't know how it is in other countries but here you give an oath to among other things says that you will defend constitutional order of my country. That mens that if someone tries to unconstitutionaly overthrow democraticly elected leadership you will have to defend it. BTW democraty allows rising up and throwing out the president (and other elected officials) every 4 years.

 

In the discussions about the volunteer vs conscription armies, each has it's inherent strengths and weaknesses.
One thing I've not heard mentioned?
For many potential soldiers here in the United States... enlisting in the Armed Forces put new boots on their feet for the first time in their lives.
Point I'm trying to make is that for some of the boys/girls from really economically depressed and impoverished backgrounds... 3 square meals, a cot to sleep-on and a roof over your head, medical, dental care and new clothes--uniforms and boots--and a chance for education is much preferred to what they left behind.
Historically, many of these recruits were country-boys and quite a few were pretty good shots with a rifle to begin with.
It's simply a question of perspective.

Tim

 

yes ,tim ...that was certainly true of poor rural boys growing up in the depression , three squares and a cot ,new clothes and boots , and a brand new rifle gun ...yee haaaw..army life was sweet compared to home ...i dont think todays recruiters see to many boys that grew up barefoot , on hominny ,possum and grits ...todays american poor mostly have big screen cable tv (but not showtime) have one or two cars ( but neither is new)...and tend to suffer from diabetes and obiescity lottsa tater chips ,pepsi and pizza........im afraid alvin york and audie murphy are not gonna come shufflein in outta the back woods country any time soon...