The whole military thing needs to be rethought:

What is the mission? First of all national defense. We need a standing professional well trained well compensated happy group at all times for that. The standing army includes women.

Overseas and or cross border adventures? Unless it’s solely for prevention of imminent attack on our homeland, the standing military should not be involved except for volunteers from the standing army who should be immediately replaced. These volunteers could include anyone however whoever they are “fighting for” must pay them to the volunteers satisfaction. That’s right, paid mercenaries, as a profession. Volunteers from the standing military could choose to do this to make extra money with their place in the standing military open for them whenever they choose to return.

Mandatory training (limited to skills necessary for national defense) for lottery selected 18 year old men only drafted followed by enlistment for a max period of two years. The last group used to supplement standing military. After two years they can walk away, reup or apply to join the other two groups. Well paid when in action, reasonably paid for being available.

Paid fully trained at the ready volunteer military including women available to supplement standing military for national defense only. The compensation should be less than the standing military however the compensation should be both for training and readiness and more than received by the lottery draft group unless that group is fighting. The first group used to supplement standing military.

Military hardware of any sort paid for by US taxpayers only to be used for securing borders and national defense including used outside borders to prevent imminent attack on the homeland. Any and all other military hardware may be sold unless needed here for use elsewhere at full retail prices in some cases where appropriate rentals may be considered.

Compensation scales should be:

Standing military who may fight - as least as much United auto workers
Volunteer ready army - double minimum wage and when fighting same as standing military
Drafted lottery - minimum wage and when fighting same as standing military
Executives (non fighting officers) - same as standing military
Fighting executives. - same as standing army plus 59% when fighting

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

This seems to be a lot of mixed messaging. You are talking about both conscription and a standing professional army. Both exist for very different reasons.

Going all the way back to the Roman legions a professional army was invented for conquest and invading. It was specifically created to overcome defensive conscript based militaries.

So if you want a defensive force than a professional army is contrary to that goal from the start.

Part of the problem is in the West we have had a couple hundred years of propaganda thrown our way that professional soldiers are actually about defending the nation which is just factually wrong.

People are told it is just a difference in training and pay when they are fundamentally intended for opposite purposes.

Take a look at the rucksacks of most conscript militaries vs professional armies. There is a reason why most rucksacks from conscript militaries like in the former Com Bloc all are about the size of a child's school bag.

They are designed that way because they are operating under the assumption they will be performing defensive operations on friendly soil and can resupply with the locals.

Western professional militaries carry massive packs because they operate under the assumption they will be operating on hostile foreign soil so the supplies you have are what you can carry in with you.

Personally as a Canadian I am all for going all conscripts and mandatory service. It is also in practical terms the only way to have the numbers to even be useful from a defensive standpoint.

It was even briefly considered during the cold war. In the 1980s the soviet airborne alone outnumbered our entire army.

jackjjackson · 61-69, M

Not a mixed message a different message and a proper role for professional military. We need to be about of the conquest business and totally protected as much as possible from the being conquested business. We want the best possible to defend us. The draft supplements the professionals if necessary and if this strategy is properly implemented won’t be needed. @PicturesOfABetterTomorrow

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@jackjjackson What I am saying is a professional army is only something you need if you plan to attack and take other nations.

jackjjackson · 61-69, M

What I’m saying is that I want my nation defended by a professional military. Ukraine is not and things aren’t going well there. @PicturesOfABetterTomorrow

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@jackjjackson Professional soldiers are designed for one thing. Conquest.

Not having professional soldiers is why it is not going well for Russia either.

They are trying to conquer territory with a defensive force.

jackjjackson · 61-69, M

Ok. I’ll rephrase it. Well trained well paid military paid to provide permanent defense better than the power any offensive military could muster. @PicturesOfABetterTomorrow