The Instigator
Do_I_Need_A_Username
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
debatefox
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

The U.S. Military should enforce a draft

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/4/2015 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 658 times Debate No: 71039
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (0)

 

Do_I_Need_A_Username

Pro

I feel that the United States Military should enforce a draft during wartime. I feel that every U.S. citizen owes something to their country, and joining the armed forces is the way to fulfill this debt. Today, less than .5% of people in the U.S. serve in the military. That's compared to the 12% in WWII. Citizen would only have to serve a maximum of 2 years. That doesn't limit the freedom of citizens, while, at the same time, building strong armed forces. This would also give citizens a great experience. This would enhance their discipline, team working skills, and physical ability. Also, people who want to run for president would have a military experience, and that would make them a better commander in chief. Overall, a military draft would be beneficial to the United States and it's citizens.

Sources: http://www.nytimes.com...
debatefox

Con

I want to start by saying i'm really excited to be debating against you. I don't know much about U.S government policy but I will try my best to research and get my point through thank you.

a quote from the United states national anthem. "O'er the land of the free..." lets think about it. if the land of the free took away or even abridged the freedom to decline military enrollment it would not be so free now, would it?

"less than .5% of people in the U.S. serve in the military. That's compared to the 12% in WWII. " you have just compared a time with very little war going on to a time when the whole world was fighting. also now day's we specific non manned drones which decline the need of humans.

in 1939 when world war 2 started the us had around 130 million citizens. 12 percent of that comes out to an outstanding 15,708,000 now the usa has a population of 318.9 million and 5 percent of that is 15,945,000. their are more people joining today then in 1939.
Debate Round No. 1
Do_I_Need_A_Username

Pro

I'm glad you decided to accept my debate. Good luck and I hope you have fun with the debate.

We wouldn't be limiting freedom. Citizens would have to serve 2 years. After that, they can do any occupation they want. They would also get paid in the military, giving citizens a free job. All the citizens wold also receive all benefits that come with joining the military. Such as, GI Bill, Tuition Assistance, Service-member Opportunity Colleges, Education on Duty, etc. An occupation in the military can also build character. This will assist people who want to work in the civilian world after their military occupation.

Also, the military would always need strong manpower. Manpower is irreplaceable. Machines can malfunction. Non-manned drones can also be very costly.

As of right now, the United States has gotten involved with most foreign conflict. It would be a good idea to have a large military so we would not be weakened if any large and powerful country would to start conflict.

A very low percentage of citizens joining the military shows that citizens are ready exploit the countries benefits and advantages, but don't want to defend it. If citizens wish to get the benefits of being a citizen, they should protect the country and all it's benefits.

Sources: http://www.military.com...
debatefox

Con

"We wouldn't be limiting freedom. " a draft would be forcing a person to give up two years of their life without any say in it. their is no freedom in that.

The size of the military, although helpful, does not play a big enough role in modern conflict. It used to matter in trench warfare because teach side used to keep throwing men at each other until one gave up. but with more modern tactics and technology has cut the number of soldiers needed to win a war.

when compared together percents mean nothing. if the same amount of men fight each year but the population grows the percent will shrink. the way you find a percent is X/Y if X goes up and y stays the same then the over all fraction will grow, but in this case Y is going up and X is staying the same the percent declines. of course because population is an irregular thing it fluctuates causing both example A and example B to occur.

you said joining the military would be " giving citizens a free job." this is incorrect. drafting would be forcing citizens into a job.

the average pay for americans is about 44,00 dollars compared to the 43,000 dollars a soldier is payed. these soldiers sacrifice their life and the us government can put a price on that? oh yah it's 43,000 dollars
Debate Round No. 2
Do_I_Need_A_Username

Pro

Having citizens fight for their freedom is a great way to make them appreciate it. This isn't taking away their freedom, it just presents them with an opportunity to pay back their country.

In recent years, the United States has not experienced grand scale conflicts. We've had small scale conflicts, mostly in the Middle East. It's not known that if the amount of troops we're using now would be effective on a larger scale conflict.

Joining the military for 2 years would be a free job. They would get military pay for the time they wish to serve, and when their done in the military, they will receive civilian pay when they have served their time.

You have also yet to address the fact that military experience can improve people who wish to run for president. They would have a first hand experience of how the military works, which would make them a better commander in chief.

You have also not addressed the fact that the military offers many benefits. As listed before, GI Bill, Tuition Assistance, Service-member Opportunity Colleges, Education on Duty, etc.
debatefox

Con

You have offered up no proof o any of your comments. you have also repeated many of the arguments over and over again. I have already debunked them and you just push them forward again like somehow restating the argument in different diction is putting up new arguments. So i don't think i am going to argue this round. because i will just be restating every thing i said in the previous rounds.
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Do_I_Need_A_Username 2 years ago
Do_I_Need_A_Username
Bruh! Seriously! Viewed 123 times and no one voted.
Posted by debatefox 2 years ago
debatefox
the only new argument here was the usage of AI's to fulfill the militaries need and I put that up
Posted by debatefox 2 years ago
debatefox
in round three you talk about

1. not taking away freedom

2. leadership benefits and you put up no further arguments. you are the instigator you are supposed to put up the arguments i am supposed to disprove them that is how a debate works.
Posted by debatefox 2 years ago
debatefox
I do see how in round two you have inserted one comment but its a weak one.
Posted by debatefox 2 years ago
debatefox
round 2

1: wouldn't limit freedom. you included no proof or backing for this spineless comment

2: low percentage of people join the military. again I showed you how your statement was wrong.
Posted by debatefox 2 years ago
debatefox
round 1
2 experience

3 does not limit freedom
Posted by debatefox 2 years ago
debatefox
round 1 your arguments were
1 to small of a percentage are joining
Posted by Do_I_Need_A_Username 2 years ago
Do_I_Need_A_Username
I have sources at the bottom of my arguments. I have not been restating my arguments, I have been defending them.
Posted by debatefox 2 years ago
debatefox
sorry for the grammor and spelling mistakes I was a little rushed on time.
No votes have been placed for this debate.