The Instigator
Xanderwro18
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
gannon260
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

Should America have Mandatory Military Service?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
gannon260
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/18/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 471 times Debate No: 68523
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (2)
Votes (3)

 

Xanderwro18

Pro

Im saying Yes because of the simple fact of the recent fighting and killing in America and the lack of commitment to our great nation. Look at us, we are being attacked in the streets and we have tried the simple talking to each other and it has not worked and by having a stronger military can only benefit us.
gannon260

Con

NO, Recent fightings and killings are a rather common occurence in any civilization, country, or state. I believe the kind of country you are looking for is North Korea. They have a strong military and that has ended most violence. There is no violence because there is no freedom. A strong military is also extremely costly, which north korea has proved. Instead of allocating resources to increase their crop yields, economic growth, and civilian population, they have have allocated most of their resources to their military and devoted to creating arms. This leads to mass poverty and starvation(USSR, North Korea, ) We are not in fact being attacked on the streets as oftenly as you imply, i have yet to see a battle. In a nation of 300 million people, it is statistically irrational to believe that conflict will not occur.

Forcing men to go to the military will demoralize the troops who are fighting. The men who don't want to go will be constantly moping and make everyone around them homesick. since it is all volunteers, the ones who serve are kick@ss since they actually want to eliminate threats to our nation aside from men who were forced to abandon their family, job, and home to fight something/someone they don't want to. morale is incredibly important for our armed force and because of this morale, it increases our military's effectiveness.
Also i personally do not want to serve in the military. Any government that forces it's citizens to serve infringes upon their rights and freedoms as they do not have a say. A larger military is not necessarily a stronger one. A larger military is not what we need, we need a stronger yet smaller military that consist of special forces teams that can eliminate any hostile threats outside our country; they are much quicker, stealthily, and cheaper then what your alternative is, which is a giant mess of sad people who don't want to be there. Also, we don't deal with internal threats with a military, we deal with internal threats with special teams like SWAT or FBI and we deal with international terrorists with NAVY SEALS or GREEN BERETS. We can also deal with terrorism or killings by expanding our countries surveillance(which i dont support, but is way better then a forced military).

vote con, it's more logical and infringes less on your human rights of liberty as well as being cheaper and more effective.
Debate Round No. 1
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
And sniped.
Posted by Mr.Kal 2 years ago
Mr.Kal
A single round can't create a proper discussion on the topic. After all a military draft is not an idea thrown around so easily.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by NoMagic 2 years ago
NoMagic
Xanderwro18gannon260Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: I don't think two sentences is an argument. I guess three paragraphs might be. Con gets those points.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
Xanderwro18gannon260Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: All of Pro's points were refuted and then some. The resolution is thus negated.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
Xanderwro18gannon260Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's counter-arguments were too good to be ignored, and because this was a one round debate, Pro didn't respond to these counter-arguments, so Con wins arguments.