The debate "Two years of military service from 18-20 should be compulsory" was started by
March 10, 2015, 5:04 pm.
7 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 23 people are on the disagree side.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
I_Voyager posted 1 argument to the agreers part.
posted the first argument on this debate as an agreeing part.
I_Voyager, Mike861, stormshy, jhussjosh, sdiop and 2 visitors agree.
Kirito, Hjkp98, CX_LD_Ashley, rickrollross, Sosocratese, Tassja, frozen_emily, eric1943, Fromage, invincible_01, transfanboy, Shreedeep, judge, evamara, AstroSpace, ayesha97 and 7 visitors disagree.
It would teach people valuable skills: how to defend yourself and your territory, how to work as a team with peers, how to stay fit. It would teach discipline and it might force the army to be more representative of the personality spectrum of its nation.
The only valid counter-argument I can think up is having a moral issue with combat or the specific wars of the time. Maybe to work around this, a system of testing or expression or interview can be used to determine if a candidate is morally compatible with "army". This private testing system can be combined with legal and public petitions to ensure the private testing system isn't manipulated to just ignore the data and place people in the army anyways.
I know a few nations have mandatory military service. I'd like to see data from how that effects their societies. But I expect it to be a relatively healthy influence.