Should military service be compulsory?
Purpose: Your goal is to write an assertive, persuasive, and even passionate argument that is also fair and correct according to college writing standards (well-researched, objective, logical, properly contextualized into the pre-existing conversation). Your topic must be consequential and focused in scope. A broad and sprawling ten-page essay with no focus will not succeed. Your ability to complete this essay will be a significant refection of your skills as an academic writer. Technique: Your essay will benefit from the use of argumentative techniques including refutation and properly executed emotional appeals. You should incorporate research to help build your credibility as a writer. Make sure you carefully evaluate the information you find using the guidelines from class. You need to make sure you use quality source material and avoid unnecessary first-person sequences. Research: You need to use a minimum of four scholarly sources. You can use credible professional sources to reach the 5-8-source minimum. You need to keep an accurate record of your sources just in case I ask to verify your use of them. It is a good idea to limit yourself to sources found via Wilmington University’s library (online and concrete). Audience: For this assignment, consider that your audience is either neutral or hostile. You must, therefore, make sure that your assertion is clearly stated in the essay. You need to make sure that the organization of the information is coherent so that your reader, if so inclined, will consider your position without having to decrypt your essay. Tone (Voice): Your voice should be formal without being stilted, following rules for Standard English. As you describe your subject honestly, your words will convey your unique voice to the reader. Consider that your tone, through your choice of words, will reveal your attitude toward your chosen subject. Humor is difficult to use in this type of writing assignment, but is not forbidden. Use it at your own risk. Structure: Your essay should contain an introductory sequence of paragraphs (1-3). Your thesis statement should be placed toward the end of that sequence. You will then craft a series of body paragraphs that prove that the assertion in the thesis is true. You will then provide a satisfying conclusion that is developed and provides closure or even an unsettled resolution that looks at broader ramifications of your assertion. Requirements: • Length: 10-14 pages (not including the cover page or references page). • APA formatting and documentation. • Research: AT LEAST 5-8 credible sources of which 4 must be scholarly (the remainder should be professional). Although the amount of supportive material may vary, you should make sure you have adequate support to persuade a difficult audience. You also want to make sure that you do not overload the essay with sources to the point where it becomes a literature review of research and not a persuasive argument. Process: This essay must go through the full writing process (prewriting and researching, drafting, meticulous revising and editing, resulting in a final draft). Any essay that does not include all stages of the writing process will not be accepted. Any essay that does not meet the requirements will not be accepted. The draft and the final essay must be uploaded to Safeassign. Due: 5/2/2014 at 11:59PM via SafeAssign
The Case against Compulsory Military Service
Name
University The Case against Reintroduction of Compulsory Military Service in The US
National security is a topic that is often ignored in public discourses. The reason for this situation is not surprising, considering that it is the responsibility of governments in many countries to provide security against external threats. For the majority of citizens who are not active servicemen and do not have relatives in the military or police force, it is too easy, and very understandable, to be oblivious of the issues that directly affect the military and the police force, such as recruitment and deployment during times of armed conflicts. In the United States, these two issues (recruitment into the military and deployment) were hot topics during the Vietnam War as they affected nearly every household. Congress passed a draft that made the conscription of young men and women into military service mandatory, and serving in the military became part of the rite of passage for many young people. Consequently, critics of the war, including students who viewed this as an unnecessary disruption of their education and career growth, opposed it in the media and through demonstrations. After the conclusion of the Vietnam War and in the years that followed, this policy was relaxed as there were no major wars to fight in, and the number of full-time servicemen increased over the same period. However, the reintroduction of compulsory military service is once again reemerging as one of the controversial issues in the United States. The pertinent issue is whether it is relevant to push for the reintroduction of compulsory military service, at a time when the world is focused on fostering international peace and the U.S. is widely criticized for its involvements in Iraq and Afghanistan. This paper examines both sides of the debate, highlighting the arguments in support and those against compulsory conscription. It concludes that while compulsory military service demonstrates patriotism and collective responsibility for a country’s security, it is irrelevant in the 21st century. The reasons include the high cost of maintaining the program, the interruption of young people’s careers, the voluntary principle of serving in the forces, and the transformation of the military into a profession that individuals may pursue like any other career.
The champions of compulsory military service argue that national security is so important that all citizens should participate in maintaining it. The rhetoric they employ in advancing this argument centers on the ideals of honor and patriotism, which call upon every citizen to be prepared to defend his or her country. In 2001, Senator John McCain, a celebrated veteran of the Vietnam War, stated that:
National service is an issue that has been largely identified with the Democratic Party and the left of the political spectrum. That is unfortunate, because duty, honor, and country are values that transcend ideology. National service, both civilian and military, can embody the virtues of patriotism that conservatives cherish (McCain, 2001).
This view implies that the issue of national security should not be debated, but should be embraced by all Americans and demonstrated through collective participation in its promotion. McCain’s support for compulsory military service is implied in his assertion that civilians can also “embody the virtues of patriotism,” suggesting that every citizen has the responsibility of serving in the armed forces. President Obama echoed similar sentiments in the same year at the signing of the Edward Kennedy Serve America Act in April 2009, where he told the nation’s youth that, “We need your service, right now, at this moment in history. I’m not going to tell you what your role should be; that’s for you to discover. But I’m asking you to stand up and play your part” (Office of the Federal Register, 2011). This call, viewed alongside McCain’s argument, shows that the political fraternity is united in supporting compulsory military service. And it is hard to begrudge them because they both appeal to the ideals that are most valued by all patriotic citizens- honor and love for one’s country. Regardless, the weakness of the two leaders’ arguments is the implied assumption that compulsory military service is the only means through which citizens can serve their country. Ordinary citizens, in their every-day work, serve the country by developing its economy and supporting their families. It is very unfortunate, therefore, that patriotism should be reduced to the ability and willingness to serve in the uniform.
The idea of obligation as the prerequisite to the right for citizenship is also advanced as the basis for supporting compulsory military service. This argument follows the logic that a claim to citizenship presumes a number of obligations, including the duty to protect and defend one’s country against its enemies (McCain, 2001). Accordingly, the concept of citizenship is understood as a matter of responsibility, whereby individuals have no choice but to meet certain obligations as compensation for the right to citizenship. In this regard, people earn citizenship by being ready to serve their countries regardless their economic or social status. However, this argument is narrow as it champions military service above other duties that citizens have to their country. Paying taxes, for instance, is in itself a fulfillment of a very critical role by ordinary citizens. The people who pay taxes support various government projects and services, such as paying policemen and soldiers involved in maintaining national security. At the same time, conscription of people into the military compromises the voluntary nature of military service. An enforced program would make the recruits government subjects, as opposed to the voluntary nature of offering one’s services/labor. The American constitution promotes individual freedoms, and the idea of forcing people into some government projects violates their rights.
Obesity and other weight-related problems is one of the major health challenges facing the American society today, and it has been suggested that participation in mandatory military service would help in curbing this problem. Statistics indicate that in the last two decades, obesity rates in the U.S. have increased drastically, and continue to rise steadily. In 2010, it was estimated that obesity rates averaged at around 20 percent across all states, and had increased to over 37 percent by 2013 (Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 2014). Among children and young adults aged between two and nineteen years, the average rate is 17 percent. These statistics point to a worrying trend in the health status of Americans. If it is allowed to continue this way, in future America will have an alarmingly high percentage of people suffering from weight-related complications. Enforcing compulsory service in the military will help in reversing this trend by compelling individuals to be more physically active to maintain the physical fitness standards required of military service men and women. This conclusion is based on findings from studies on the health impact of physical activity on school-going children (Story, Nanney, & Schwartz, 2009), in which physical activity helped in reducing and/or maintaining a desirable body weight. Nevertheless, the idea of forcing people to maintain a given lifestyle is not appealing. Luxury is an important component in Americans’ desire to live The American Dream, and those who can afford to live an easy lifestyle have the right to do so. It is against the principles of democracy and liberty, which are highly regarded in most democracies, to coerce citizens into a standard way of life. Health is a personal choice, and education alone is enough to keep people informed of the consequences of their lifestyle choices.
Finally, proponents of compulsory military service argue that its implementation will promote better foreign policies among states. It is argued that there would be less international conflicts because countries would be discouraged from invading others if the target boasts a large military-trained human resource base, which can be easily mobilized to wage a serious counter attack. In this regard, compulsory military service may encourage non-aggressive foreign policies around the world and promote international peace. A good example is Greece, which has a compulsory military service law and is rarely involved in international conflicts. This is because a situation where everyone is directly or indirectly affected by war, such as having a family member in the military, public opinion dissuades governments from engaging in armed conflicts. In the case of Greece, journalist and former soldier Christopher Yates writes in The Guardian that the government would not have sent troops into Iraq “Because every mother in the country would need to know why” (Yates, 2013). This observation reflects the situation in America during the Vietnam War, in which the majority of Americans opposed the war because nearly every family was affected. Regardless, this reasoning is blind to the fact that if all nations enforced mandatory military service, the situation would not be different from a case where none had compulsory military service. This is because the ratio of trained men and women will remain the same, depending on each nation’s population size. At the same time, modern warfare is driven by technological inventions, and a country with superior technology will not be afraid of attacking those with little technology regardless the size of their military. Similarly, even countries with mandatory military service like Israel have not been spared from foreign aggression. In this regard, the foreign policies adopted by countries and the prevailing political conditions play a more prominent role in international conflicts than the size of a country’s military human resource. Moreover, international terrorism poses a more serious threat than foreign aggression by other countries. This is because terrorism is supported by a global network of criminals who do not have allegiance to a particular country, which makes it difficult to identify the enemy and retaliate.
The argument against comp...