this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2024
57 points (96.7% liked)
United States | News & Politics
7211 readers
277 users here now
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Conservatives love this idea, to the point that they don’t even bother thinking about who is going to pay for it. If you did mandatory service for people 18-20 the armed forces would be roughly 20 times larger than it is now in terms of personnel, 10 times larger if it were mandatory for men only. Military spending is nearly 1/4 of the total budget as-is, where is the funding going to come from if you have 10 or 20 times as many people to arm and train?
And what the fuck are you going to have them all do? They’re just gonna bum around and fuck for two years and then go get free degrees on the GI bill, driving up the cost even further.
Truly, the party of fiscal responsibility.
tbf a lot of military budget is on R&D and equipment, training is only a tiny fraction of it. Just compare the spending and the personnel with China.
I don’t think it’s tiny enough that you could multiply it by 20 and still call it tiny.