Nguyen Ba Khang
Owing to the increasing number of international conflicts, having a strong army seems to be significantly important to any individual country. As a result of this, conscription can be considered as an efficient method to enhance military force. However, bringing back conscription or not has led to two contrary sides of argument. To present a general view regarding this phenomenon, two article “Bring back conscription” and “Conscription? No way” will be critically responded. Summary:
In the article “Bring back conscription”, colonel Blythe (2010) argues that the return of conscription is significantly essential. He begins by claiming that conscription is a feasible solution to reinforce national security after a massive decrease in the number of military recruits. In addition, he also asserts that developing characteristic such as leadership or teamwork is a benefit provided when participating in military. According to Blythe, self-knowledge educated in military is much better than “any number of years spent at school or university”. He contends that soldiers not only have opportunities to study professional skills such as computers, logistics and mechanical ones but also widen their vision by traveling to other areas. Finally, he believes that the return of conscription will preserve the equality between poor and rich people; since recently most people serving in military are the poor. On the other hand, in the article “Consription? No way!” Dennis De Souza argues against bringing back conscription. He claims that although benefits from applying to military such as building characteristic of young people are incontestable, the culture of army including brutality and violence these adolescents. More importantly, he assures that there are many dangerous situations which may lead military personnel to injures, deaths and traumas caused by killing other people. According to De Souza, bringing back conscription is totally unnecessary...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document