Talk:National service in the United States

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

[Untitled]

This article was split out of National service, so the rationale for the POV tag from Talk:National service is provided below.--Kineticman (talk) 08:28, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

== new section needs NPOV corrections ==

Given its source, it's no surprise that the new section on America has a pro-national-service bias. The section needs to be changed to be from a neutral POV.--Cybercobra (talk) 02:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vietnam War pro-consciption bias

"The unfortunate reaction of the military (particularly the Army), was to scapegoat the institution of conscription, rather than focusing on its own ineffective strategy of continuing attrition warfare. Seeking to insulate future military operations from the ups and downs of American civilian control of the military, military leaders looked to examples like the Israeli 1967 Six-Day War as proof that all future conflicts would move so fast that there would be no time to train conscripts. Combined with the gaining influence of the Military-Industrial Complex, the country was gradually sold on the virtues of a technologically-driven, professional military"

The above lines show a clear non-neutral POV towards consciption, blaming the end of conscirption on the military's strategy, and describing it as "unfortunate". This section should be rewritten to a neutral POV or balenced with alternative views on the end of consciption in the United States after the Vietnam War. obama=osama(Yomamma22) (talk) 03:53, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And, since this quoted piece is lacking any citation, it could be original research. Having been a victim of the Vietnam draft, I have some person interest in the subject. As I recall at the time the draft was abolished, the prevailing sentiment was that the draft was unfair, being directed solely against young males, and with the idea that only the poor and uneducated got drafted (I was neither!). If the idea expressed in the quote can be attributed to some reliable and knowledgeable source, then provide the cite. 69.29.207.109 (talk) 19:36, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Civil War Section improvements

The civil war section is fairly uninformitave and needs additional, cited information. The section describes "The federal draft was first applied in the American Civil War, though on a very limited basis with only 2% of the Union Army being draftees". The historical record shows 2% to be clearly untrue and has no mention of its effect on the military and outcome of the war, or opposition to the practice (New York Draft Riots etc.) obama=osama(Yomamma22) (talk) 03:58, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on National service in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080728232845/http://ap.google.com:80/article/ALeqM5hO4EacUG8MhkB5Qph03vDmrebSzwD921VSJG0 to http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hO4EacUG8MhkB5Qph03vDmrebSzwD921VSJG0

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:39, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]