Tweet
I don't think this would work as well in America since we have no borders and WAY too much diversity. With diversity comes lack of loyalty. Also we have the anti-America political system. Still, some parts sound good (to me) such as all males serving time in the military, being allowed to keep their service rifle after duty and all males being required to be able to handle a gun.
-
-
Switzerland was ranked fourth in the UN's 2017 World Happiness Report. -
Switzerland still has one of the highest rates of gun violence in Europe, and most gun deaths in the country are suicides. -
I've never understood the disparity in these statements. I've seen them reported elsewhere. At least the Swiss are courteous enough to kill themselves without taking out fifteen innocent people with them.If I should die before I wake...great,a little more sleep. -
I have to work with Swiss people, and occasionally go there for work. They have rules for everything. Someone doesn't own a gun in Switzerland without jumping through hoops. The idea of adapting the "lots of guns" part of the Swiss model without the "lots of hoops" part and expecting to get the same result as the Swiss doesn't make sense.Comment
-
Mandatory service in this country wouldn't work because a great deal of the population in this country is unsuitable for military service. They're weak, untrainable and absolutely worthless for such responsibility.Comment
-
-
Our automated military has no need for large cohorts of conscripts. The missions are now built around volunteers backed by technically advanced firepower. Mandatory national service would be just as useful to the military now as bringing back horse cavalry.
Now if you want to have mandatory national service for other goals, different story. Lots of jobs today in land conservation that could use the manpower.Comment
-
National service in some capacity, I believe, could be a beneficial enterprise in curing the wounds of our country's interior as well as the exterior of our political divides.
Time in the military is as much a journey into adulthood as it is a washing away of prejudice and ignorance of our fellow citizens."The first gun that was fired at Fort Sumter sounded the death-knell of slavery. They who fired it were the greatest practical abolitionists this nation has produced." ~BG D. UllmanComment
-
Unfortunately "some" would complain that this is involuntary servitude and thus a form of slavery. Very few would be willing to do anything but to complain about being forced to do something useful. Kennedy asked the people to do something for the country, now people "demand" from the country. The country has declined from 1944 when 18 YO would go into Normandy, now "demand" counseling and a safe room against "hateful" words. After seeing up close locally from "youth" unless sex and alcohol/drugs are involved they are not interested.
SamComment
-
The other side of the coin is the military is there to DEFEND the country, not act as the national babysitter. If there are problems with young people (and there are!) don't pass them on to the Army, it ain't our job.Comment
-
Sounds like the military may be building that southern wall, that's not really their job either...
"The first gun that was fired at Fort Sumter sounded the death-knell of slavery. They who fired it were the greatest practical abolitionists this nation has produced." ~BG D. UllmanComment
-
Putting our military on our border might not be a bad idea in self protection. Money would be better spent in our nation then guarding some other place on this planet. 5 or 6 divisions with mobile air assets and surveillance would put a dent in smuggling of any type. On both coastal waters the intake by sea would be greatly hindered as well. Something has to be done to stop smuggling of any thing/one across our borders as we need to secure our nation from any foreign invasion as currently going on.
SamComment
-
Well why not privatize border security instead of putting a ponderous government bureaucracy in the field, right? More bang for the buck. Create the right performance incentives and who knows, maybe the force pays for itself.Comment
-
This comes up regularly, but I thought I'd chip in a comment because I actually had a career in this field at one time.
First of all, where would those five divisions come from? Right now the Army has, if my memory serves me correctly, 11 active combat divisions including armored and airborne formations. Even if we did have the troops and they weren't already committed elsewhere there is the problem of degradation of operational readiness that would surely occur by turning assault infantry units into border guards not to mention the issue of soldiers not being cops. You folks who complain regularly about cop misconduct....well you haven't seen anything until you put a bunch of soldiers on the border and tell them that with a wave of the hand they're LEOs. I recall an earlier time when National Guard troops were put on the border and one of them shot and killed a teenager (United States Citizen teenager) who was bringing in a heard of goats (or was it sheep?) at dusk. Well that one was swept under the carpet post haste in a cover up that easily equals any of the other cover ups that get discussed on this forum.
When I went to work for the 'gubmint in the early 1970s the Border Patrol had just over 2,000 agents for all of the borders of the United states and some specific ports like Baton Rouge and Miami. Obviously a total of maybe 300 agents on the entire southern border wasn't going to do the job. Now the "Patrol" has around 25,000 Border Patrol Agents with plans to add up to 10,000 more, that's the equivalent of two divisions, which think ought to be enough. To reach that strength, since proficiency in the Spanish language is an absolute necessity, and the fact that when I was in as much as half of every class washed out mostly because of an unwillingness to put in the time and effort to obtain proficiency in the Spanish language, the vast majority of the Border Patrol is made up of second generation Latinos.
The fact is, the simple act of enforcing the law has dramatically cut illegal immigration.Last edited by Art; 03-25-2018, 03:03.Comment
-
What I was trying to imply and doing so miserably is the need of armed American's to stop the invasion of our borders. I tend to agree with the concept of a LEO, but some armed military in a mobile capacity could come in handy. We have mobile air assets who could be employed in their ability to reinforce the LEO in their job. Armored assets is not a need, maybe some Striker's available. Enforcing legal employment , so is boots on the ground to do drug interdiction and capture of those doing it. Let it be know in Mexico that any captured smuggler will receive 5-10 years in a federal penial institution.
SamComment
Comment