Military Service for all between 16 and 21
Debate Rounds (3)
colourburst forfeited this round.
Well, seems like victory is the military. XD
True, you might say that the military would teach them discipline, respect and loyalty, but what about the bad qualities that they adapt to? You would become aggressive, cold-hearted, misunderstanding... it could all be the cause of the military (especially since young people are more vulnerable) Fighting in video games might look easy,but real life is always harder. 16 year olds, being the youngest in the concerned age group, how can they manage it? Many soldiers have to live with life-long physical injuries, don't they? The loss of a limb or two is the most obvious example.
Soldiers can also face lifelong mental difficulties. The constant stress of being in the military, watching their friends die for their country's sake, is too much to bear. Even most veterans commit suicide because they can't deal with it. (Like Tommy Lee Jones character in Heaven and Earth)
Troops serving are risking their life and limb for corporate profits, not for freedom, democracy or protection of their country. They must all know this since it's so obvious to anyone, right? As David Icke once said, "When you join the military you are not serving your country. You are serving an evil cabal that wants to enslave you. Also, Henry Kissinger said, "Military men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy"
So why would they agree to give up their life and limb to serve greedy corrupt corporations? No sane person would do that. especially since the elites and politicians that sent them to war refuse to send their own sons to fight in it. Don't the troops care about hypocrisy?
What's ridiculous is that if a private citizen committed murder, he/she would go to jail or get the death penalty. But f the government murders thousands or millions of innocent people, the no one responsible goes to jail or receives capital punishment for murdering thousands. This is based on the principle that government= justice, so anything it does (including murdering many innocent people for profit and conquest) must be right and moral, since might makes right.
My opponent makes a terrible assumtion that all Military men and women are quote aggressive, cold-hearted, misunderstanding... That is a oppinionated statement which his following arguements tend to follow. He has shown no proof, refrencing movies and videogames as his source of logic. He assumes that all milatary men ar cold-hearted people. If he ever met someone from the military he would have known that there are many charismatic and entertaining indeviduals. My opponent also is misleading due to the fact that he is insinuating that the only thing the military does is engage in wars intentionally. One can join the military and may never experience war.
Also if military service was compulsery for ages 16 up one would have to assume that he would not be fit for physical combat until he completed at least 1-2 years of training. That would mean that the young indevidual would not be effective for a combatative situation until he was 18 years of age. This is the age that one is allowed to choose to join the military and they are considered an adult. Compulsery military service is without a doubt an effective startagy to teach the morals based above.
My opponent also insinuates that it is not ok for anyone the ages under 21 to lose a limb saying 16 year olds, being the youngest in the concerned age group, how can they manage it? Many soldiers have to live with life-long physical injuries, don't they? But implies that losing a limb over the age of 21 is ok? This is obvioulsy flawed logic and should be considered a pointless arguement.
Lastly my opponent implies that ALL military service is a corprate back facade to create cash. This is untrue in most of the world where countries enfore Military service as basic protection against other countries and regemes that would prefer to invade and destroy thier country. Basic military knolage helps comunities, states and countries defend them selves. It makes it harder for a country to enslave and supress its own population with its permenant military, when Its own citizens have not only the numerical advantage, but also have the military knolage and capabilites to fight against supressiive regimes.
In closing my opponent has failed to show facts or reasoning supporting his arguement, showing that his view points are not only flawwed but also are limited to a small ammount of countries where this could be applicable. He ignores the countries that create a military for self defense and insinuates a lot of things that are untrue.
Thank you for creating a debate, I hope we can debate some other time!
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.