It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

should the minimum age for enlistment to the armed forces be raised to 21 or possibly even higher?

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by lewman
 


i have expressed my thoughts one this several times, i joined the marine corp when i was 17 had to have my parents sign. the question was asked one day in boot camp why they wanted mainly younger men. the company commander said that they wanted younger men because " you'd be surprised what a 17 year old can do with a M 16 in their hand" and that at a younger age you are more impressionable, and better able to be brought into physical shape. in others words they want to make you think that your, ten feet tall and bullet proof.

now i joined back in 1979, while i was still in high school. and i couldn't wait until i turned 18 so i could drink a
beer with out the cops bugggin me. but here in fl, they changed the law from 18 to 19 in 1980, this pissed me off,
i always thought if i am old enough to go and die for my country, then i should be allowed to drink a beer if i want.
i joined the corp when i was a jr. in high school, under the delayed entry program. and then i found out that if you were active military that 18 was still legal.

as time has gone on most all the states in the us have changed to 21, thanks to all the mad mommas out there. also there are a few us territories that 18 is still the legal age. it seems to me, that if you are old enough to die in
the service of your country, you can join the armed services at 17 ( with a parents signature), vote when your 18.
you should be able to drink a damn beer at that age. if the fed thinks, you can defend the country or make a decision on who or what runs this country, you should be able to par take of all the rights it has to offer it's citizens.

now for the question of minimum age, i think that the age is fine, but there should be a test on the mental make up of the individual. to see if they are mature enough to understand what they will be asked to do, and if they can
make the right choices in a life or death situation. also this may sound sexist, but i feel that women that want to be in combat should have to prove that they are able to do the same as men, carry the same load and take all the physical stresses that a man does. now i know that i will probably be slammed for that last comment, hell more than likely every thing that i have said. but every body knows that some people are wired different than others.

i could go on and on about all the differences there are in both sexes and how the mental make up is different in all, men and women. but that would turn into a book and i don't want to be labeled as a sexist, raciest, bigot,
and or any other uncomplimentary name there is. fact is i'm not, i just feel that should be some higher
standards made, and all that apply should meet them.




posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 10:16 AM
link   
Keep it at 19. If I had my way everyone would take 2 years off after high school to get some bearing of what they want out of life. An option for a couple years in the military could be attractive to many of our young adults.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 10:30 AM
link   
No. The age is fine.
I have seen and I myself was one of those immature kids that enlisted at the age of 17.
Within the first year, I changed and understood that my actions had repercussions.
If the argument is that people of that age are not ready, then how can people in that same age range go off to college, where there is even less discipline/oversight and make it through?

Sounds to me like an anti-military mentality.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


its not an anti military mentality i just think that people should reach some stage of maturity before they can join the military as you cant opt out once you have signed up and at 17 and 18 i used to change my mind every other day about things and was also easily led on by others.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by DrumsRfun
 
don't for get the real bad part die before your 18th 19th BD , that it reality, lower the drinking age it was raised in 1983. it is a joke if they want to drink they will drink so why have them break the law or go to Mexico, just lower it, think of the revenue.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by lewman
 


Ok, so not an anti thread.
I think it is great for young people. I knew that if I had gone to college, it would have been 6 years for a 4 year degree.
It teaches people to make a commitment and keep to it.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by lewman
 


People should never join the military period, i have never and never will, despite my life being absolutely destroyed.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 11:31 AM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


yes i would agree that it may be helpful in some ways to some young people but i would say the psychological damage of either killing or seeing your freinds killed would outweigh the benefits with regards to learning discipline etc...

plus here in the uk we have the merchant navy which is basically a non combat version of the royal navy and i think that could give young people the same experience without the draw backs.

out of interest,is there anything like that in the us



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   
I think the law should be raised to 21.

Way too many children think joining the military will be like a good game of "Call of Duty"

And then they die.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by lewman
 


It is a great thing to be in a country with an all volunteer military.
I never saw combat. In for 4 years.
Most of the worst things I saw was as a cop.

Why would it be any different for an 18 year old as to a 22 year old.
Maturity knows no age.

As for the poster stating that they never will and never would. Good. I am glad that you never had to serve in the military. I would not trust you with my life in a combat or military situation.
Its great when you can make your own choice.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by andy1033
 


i dont know what country you live in, or what kinda rights your country might offer you. but imo if you are not willing to fight to serve your country, and offer your life for it, that is if it is a fair and just country, you do not deserve the freedoms that said country gives you.

that being said, i know that the u.s. government has its problems, there not one government in the world that doesn't. but i believe it to be the freest country in the world, but it seems to changing more and more every day.
and that if people dont stand up, and remove corrupt politicians and their agents. and fight against oppression
where ever it is found, and voting is not gonna do it, tptb will win.

lets face it, no government though out all of history has come to be with out blood shed. hell even pacifistic will
resort to bloodshed when push comes to shove.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 11:49 AM
link   
Our military used to accept Green Card holders and they could apply for citizenship after serving 3 years honorably and pay the $375 to be a citizen. They couldn't get secret security clearances until they got citizenship.

President Bush ended that and any Green Card holder who served 1 day could get 100% free, expedited citizenship...then get a Secret Security clearance.

We've opened ourselves up for espionage, failure, bad things to happen.

If we lost that security...talking about raising the enlistment age to 21 seems a mute point.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
 


there are many nations who have more freedom than the us(unless your idea of freedom is merely being able to own a gun), the uk is probably on a similar level and australia and new zealand have quite a bit of freedom and then we must think about nations such as norway, denmark etc where they have a lot of freedom.

the land of the free is just a gimmick and from my few times in the states, i did not get the impression of being as free as i have in some other nations
edit on 28-1-2011 by lewman because: wrote there sare when i meant there are



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 12:35 PM
link   
I joined when I was 17, and it was an overall positive experience for me. I many times wish I had gone to college first, but that is not really germane to the issue here. I served with many 18-24 year olds who were way more mature than the 18-24 year olds I went to college with when I got out of the service. I would not have trusted most of those I went to college with to have my back in a firefight, but I would have happily shared a college dorm with any of the straight guys I served with. When I was in, I could drink in the Enlisted Mans club at 17 as long as I was on active duty. The drinking age was 18 at the time. I think the drinking age and the age for joining the service should both be 18.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by The_Zomar
 


really?!?!?!
What experience do you have within the military?



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 
I suspect he has no first hand experience. I believe that he is likely just spouting off based on a liberal hatred of the military.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by lewman
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
 


there are many nations who have more freedom than the us(unless your idea of freedom is merely being able to own a gun), the uk is probably on a similar level and australia and new zealand have quite a bit of freedom and then we must think about nations such as norway, denmark etc where they have a lot of freedom.

the land of the free is just a gimmick and from my few times in the states, i did not get the impression of being as free as i have in some other nations
edit on 28-1-2011 by lewman because: wrote there sare when i meant there are


that maybe true now, but until the say mid 20th century maybe even a little earlier, the u.s. was the freest country in the world. if that was not so i don't think that all the people that immigrated here would have came.
and i still think that the u.s. leads the way in immigration.( place link here, sorry wiki was the 1st one up)
en.wikipedia.org...
so according to this the u.s. is still the most desired country to come to, and i don't think that all the people before 2005 felt any different, proof is in the numbers.

but i will give you this, out of all the countries you mentioned, australia has always seemed to be more like the
u.s. than any other. well i guess canada runs a close 2nd both seem to have had a sense of independence.that
is until lets say the last 20yrs or so. the u.k. they seem a bit to socialist for me, and all the nordic countries,
well lets just say that liberal socialism is not my cup of tea. i guess all of the parliamentary monarch froms of governance seem that way to me, i might need to move to one and see whats it's like.
now dont get me wrong, i have no problem with helping people who truly need it, and cant help them selfs, but for those who hold there hands out and expect to be given something, thats where i draw the line.
well i also have heard that there is hardly any corruption in the danish government, must be nice.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
 


you make some very good points there and i would agree that the states seems to be losing many of its freedoms these days. on the immigration part i think hollywood may have something to do with that as it portrays "the american dream" in many of its movies.
infact hollwood portrays the uk in a very nice way aswell so that could be part ofthe immigration problems that we have now here but that is just a theory so dont hold me to that as a straight fact.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by The_Zomar
 


really?!?!?!
What experience do you have within the military?


Thankfully not even a minute of my life wasted on such a dead end "career"

unfortunately 20+ of my closest friends are serving and let me know what happens.

And not all of them get killed; more of them commit suicide.

edit on 28-1-2011 by The_Zomar because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by The_Zomar
 


You are so full of crap.

It is easy to armchair quarterback anything.
You have not served, therefore you really don't know.
As for your friends serving, good for them. They made a choice. They are better people for it.
The suicide rate thing? Really? That's all you got?
I have known hundreds of Vets that were in combat and don't have issues. Combat ranges from Vietnam to the current theaters of war.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join