Persuasive essay (#2) [revised]
To convince people that conscription is not a good choice to expand the army.
10/12/2005
Should the United States Reinstate Military Conscription?
The US military has not met recruitment quotas for months. The US army is using stop loss procedures to lengthen tours of duty for national guardsmen. Some suggest the government should impose conscription as in the 1960’s and 1970’s. However, conscription is not a good policy as it restricts citizens’ freedom, improperly alters citizens’ minds towards the government, and wastes tax dollars.
Conscription is an involuntary service in an army, usually by young male citizens. The word "involuntary" states that citizens cannot have their choice on the matter. And thus, it is considered as a restriction on freedom. Young males have better physical strength than people of other ages. And therefore government authorities see them as the best soldiers-to-be. It is understandable for a country to demand the most powerful army possible, especially a country like the US, being one of the strongest countries in the world and the country most threatened by terrorism. However, the men’s most precious time in life would be wasted, or sacrificed, to the military forces. These young men may have the ambition to obtain a degree as soon as possible in university rather than wasting their time serving the country in the way they do not want. According to scientific studies, from birth to the age of 25, humans have the best physical conditions to learn. Why give up the chance of inspiriting geniuses for the mere sake of wars? Freedom, one of the ideals of the Americans, would be violated if conscription was imposed. I constantly hear of young men in Taiwan, where conscription is implemented, trying the nastiest ways to run away from conscription. They present fake health reports, they study abroad, and even claim that they are homosexual. Conscription is absolutely a nightmare for them. Expanding an army, on the other hand, should be done by encouragement and recruiting volunteers.
One of the "advantages" of conscription is to build patriotism, the idea that one should contribute and be faithful to one’s country, in young citizens. Countries intend to spread the idea that it’s a duty for citizens to contribute their efforts to their country through conscription. In consequence, the minds of the population would be altered and less voices of opposition against government policies would appear. The intention of conscription is an indirect reduction of democracy. It is because when the commander-in-chief gives an order to the army, none of the soldiers can ever oppose it. Gradually soldiers will think that they have little power in influencing the government. One should have the right to choose whether to be faithful or not to one’s country. Those who have faith in their country, and are willing to offer their effort to their country, can volunteer themselves to join the army; whereas others, should not be forced to join the army. Moreover, patriotism can be built up in schools instead, not in the army. In this way, females can benefit too.
Some people think that conscription provides a steady supply of military forces. However, after the 20th century, when 2 major wars in human history had taken place, political leaders understand the disadvantage of wars. Under the influence of the UN, they have put "war" at the bottom of the foreign policy list. Tax money is constantly wasted to train a steady supply of soldiers for wars which have almost no possibility of happening. The least sensible thing a government can do is to implement military conscription during peace time. This is because tax money is not spent on the most urgent issues. Moreover, even if wars did happen, basic battle training could be completed in a very short time. There’s no sense letting water dripping down the drain without fixing the tap.
People may also argue that conscription can be seen as a training of basic survival skills, and discipline, which is important for a human being. But these can be taught in schools instead, and females can benefit from that too. Another advantage of conscription may be the chance for the military to choose the best men to join the army as conscription provides the greatest variety of candidates. Nevertheless, the soldiers enrolled in conscription usually have less morale, and this will definitely reduce the quality of the army, even though there are good warriors. The military should only recruit soldiers who are willing to die for their country.
America, a strong country established in the idea of liberty, democracy and equality, should not consider implementing conscription. Firstly, teenagers should have the right to determine the use of their most precious and most important time in life as freely as they determine whom to vote for. It is ridiculous for somebody to have the right to choose whom they want to run their government but not have the right to choose their own fate. Under the idea of liberty, citizens must not be forced to join the army when they don’t want to. It’s a glory to be a soldier and serve the country, but people should have the right to choose whether to be a hero. Secondly, democracy is the idea that a country is ruled by the people. Conscription influences the minds of the young to obey what is said by the seniors. It spreads the belief that a person should not oppose the superiors, which is the government. And therefore, democracy would be reduced if conscription was imposed. Thirdly, the world is in harmony, wars have almost disappeared in the world. If there is no war, why bother wasting tax money on a steady supply of armies that will not be used in the future? Fourthly, when soldiers are enrolled through conscription, the morale in the army will surely drop. Therefore, the US government should not reinstate military conscription and should only recruit volunteers.
文章定位：
