Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Henry_VIII
I see this subject as two separate issues:
General preparedness of the American fighting public.
Specific deployment in times of conflict/war.
For small scale conflicts or wars, volunteer based armies are best. The reason is simple. People who volunteer are already motivated (financially, educationally, patriotically, etc.) and tend to produce higher quality troops for a proportionally small army.
For large scale wars/invasions, having a well trained population becomes increasingly important. Obviously, if a significant percentage of the population is needed to fight then training the entire country is a monumental task to undertake at the time of war. The training must be done in advance.
One question that remains is what is small-scale and what is large-scale. I'm not sure I have a ready answer for that as it would have to take in lots of factors.
I do have concerns about the general preparedness of the country, though. Mandatory service would definitely help there, but I wouldn't want that to take the place of our volunteer army.
|
That´s basicly what we have in Germany. We do have a draft and almost everyone either has to do a couple months of military service or as an alternative a couple months of civil service (at hospitals for example). People who do well at the draft can become lifers with specialized training and a military career. All the soldiers engaged in Afghanistan and elsewhere around the world are either lifers or volunteers (with better then normal training). I think it´s a good formula. We have a professional, standing army but also a huge portion of people has at least some military expirience if it should be necessary to defend the country in an all out war.