this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2024
211 points (95.7% liked)

politics

19149 readers
3629 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/16599001

“Why wouldn’t we give that a try?”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] makeshiftreaper 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Trump fails logistics once again. Mandatory military service makes sense in smaller countries because you need a minimum number of people to make a military function. In larger countries like America, we wouldn't even know what to do with that many soldiers. On average 4 million Americans turn 18 each year. Let's assume we're only taking men, and that generously half of them find a way out of service. That's still 1 million new recruits each year. America has the third largest military in terms of manpower in the world and we have 1.4 million active duty troops. In one year we'd double the number of active troops. Now you need to pay, feed, house, arm, and train them, which all takes... more personnel!

After seeing his absolutely bungled exit from Afghanistan, I have full faith in that administration to handle that transition

[–] Zehzin 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

I'm sure they could put a couple hundred thousands to build and guard the camps inside the US

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice 1 points 5 months ago

Don't forget the walls. And then those to build the towers that will have to shoot down the drug drops that will still fly over in drones if it were cement like the great wall. Oh, and those checking for tunnels. As our expenses go up and up as we start having people constantly hunting for tunnels and our population declining and taxes be reduced on the rich.... What happens to the country?

All of this avoided by legalizing and taxing the drugs, growing them here. Easier to regulate, and it cuts the funding to the cartels allowing Mexico to stabilize better and slowly maybe south America if we partner with them on manufacturing. Inflation stabilizes there, a lot more places to live safely. Reducing immigration, while keeping immigrants coming at rates that we can set with updated policy. (That part requires the legislative branch to do their job).. actually all of it requires the legislative branch to do their job. Set age and term limits... Scrub the rust off.