Trump is trying to politicize the military

[SLD]

So this past week has seen several initiatives by Trump to turn the military into an arm of the Republican Party, and him in particular. It started with the open meeting with the generals and admirals where, after talking about the way Obama walked down stairs, said that they needed to be ready to fight the enemy within, and then proceeded to say they’d get training by fighting in an urban setting in the U.S. The statements were stunning. But the flag officers refused to respond with applause or anything but stony silence. Trump apparently was unhappy with the response he got.

Trump has also called for the deployment of National Guard troops to Portland and Chicago. A judge just struck down the deployment in Portland, but it will likely be appealed to the Trump friendly Supreme Court. I haven’t read the opinion so I can’t predict if it will be upheld. But regardless, the danger to civil military relations is seriously threatened. If the military is ever seen as being used against the people, or even ever is seen as an element of conservatism in the United States, the people will lose all respect for it. It will be a disaster for the military, and I think the generals and admirals know it.

I used to be against the draft. Now I’ve reconsidered. We don’t need a professional military, we need a citizen one. One where its leaders can’t be sure that the ranks will simply obey their orders. We need a military made up of people who are not concerned with making the military a career, but are willing to serve their country and take the oath to the Constitution for a period of time. A draft will sweep up liberals and conservatives alike. MAGATs will be forced to work with liberals. Races will be mixed. It could not be politicized.

Hopefully our military leaders understand the dangers that Trump poses to them and will respond with honor, telling him to no. But I’m not holding my breath.

 

[bilby]

I used to be against the draft. Now I’ve reconsidered. We don’t need a professional military, we need a citizen one. One where its leaders can’t be sure that the ranks will simply obey their orders. We need a military made up of people who are not concerned with making the military a career, but are willing to serve their country and take the oath to the Constitution for a period of time.

The draft eliminates that word I have highlighted.

You have a citizen military, made up of people who are willing to serve their country and take the oath to the Constitution for a period of time.

Of course those people are also "concerned with making the military a career", but you can't avoid that without taking away the "willing to", and replacing it with "told to".

 

[bilby]

Races will be mixed.

Well, they weren't before 1948, but that didn't stop the US military from being pretty effective.

It could not be politicized.

 

[Terrell]

Sounds like disciplinary issues waiting to happen. You're forcing millions of people who don't want to be there, may have better options, or both to do military service. It's when and how many, not if, people aren't going to be willing to play ball. Not to mention most 18 year olds are not qualified to be in the military.

Military Times article

At least some of these people will have talents that can be put to better use elsewhere, you're delaying their ability to do so. It's also going to cost a bunch of money, those people have physical needs, that will cost tax dollars to fulfill, and those people are going to want paychecks. They're not going to be happy if they could get higher pay elsewhere and are barred from doing so.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Sounds like disciplinary issues waiting to happen. You're forcing millions of people who don't want to be there, may have better options, or both to do military service. It's when and how many, not if, people aren't going to be willing to play ball. Not to mention most 18 year olds are not qualified to be in the military.

Military Times article

At least some of these people will have talents that can be put to better use elsewhere, you're delaying their ability to do so. It's also going to cost a bunch of money, those people have physical needs, that will cost tax dollars to fulfill, and those people are going to want paychecks. They're not going to be happy if they could get higher pay elsewhere and are barred from doing so.

Many disciplinary issues stem from supervisors letting the small things go, the stuff that doesn't warrant action by the commanding officer. People with disciplinary issues or just bad attitudes will have them no matter where they are or what they are doing.

If we want a qualified pool of individuals, mandatory registration and calling up a portion of them as needed will do. Affects to careers that are put on hold can be mitigated by law just as there are laws in place now to protect service members and their family financially. Remember, for the vast majority of the human population, careers in the hard sciences are not going to be disrupted. Most people are just filling cubicles.

Plenty of countries have mandatory conscription Switzerland, Norway, Greece and Finland which I'm told is the happiest place on earth. Finland is six months to a year. That's a high turnover rate and they seem to find the money for it.

Peoples perception of the military must largely come from movies, that there needs to be some warrior attitude to serve. Or maybe it's piss poor marketing on the part of the military. It floors me that people willingly take on a mountain of student loan debt that will take them on average 20 years to pay off when for three years of active duty between high school and college the government would pay for it all for four years and provide a monthly tax free allowance along the way. Here that allowance would be about $1400, in Southern California, about $4000. For most, this is way better than mom and dad can do.

 

[ZiprHead]

So this past week has seen several initiatives by Trump to turn the military into an arm of the Republican Party, and him in particular. It started with the open meeting with the generals and admirals where, after talking about the way Obama walked down stairs, said that they needed to be ready to fight the enemy within, and then proceeded to say they’d get training by fighting in an urban setting in the U.S. The statements were stunning. But the flag officers refused to respond with applause or anything but stony silence. Trump apparently was unhappy with the response he got.

Members of the military are not allowed to make political gestures, such as applauding the political speech of Trump, while in uniform.

 

[Shadowy Man]

So this past week has seen several initiatives by Trump to turn the military into an arm of the Republican Party, and him in particular. It started with the open meeting with the generals and admirals where, after talking about the way Obama walked down stairs, said that they needed to be ready to fight the enemy within, and then proceeded to say they’d get training by fighting in an urban setting in the U.S. The statements were stunning. But the flag officers refused to respond with applause or anything but stony silence. Trump apparently was unhappy with the response he got.

Members of the military are not allowed to make political gestures, such as applauding the political speech of Trump, while in uniform.

It is convention not to do so but I am guessing that Hegseth and Trump would allow it.

It is like saying that the Hatch Act disallows behavior currently being undertaken by agencies of the government.

 

[ZiprHead]

It is convention not to do so but I am guessing that Hegseth and Trump would allow it.

They absolutely already did it at the rally they had at the Army base. Remember the soldiers behind Trump laughing and whooping it up?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

All I will say is watch what happens next time there is a military meeting and Trump pressures to applaud. It will happen and those who do not applaud will be purged eventually. Probably he will mention this at the next State of the Union as well, even to the Supreme Court. They will cave eventually, too.

 

[Jarhyn]

It is convention not to do so but I am guessing that Hegseth and Trump would allow it.

They absolutely already did it at the rally they had at the Army base. Remember the soldiers behind Trump laughing and whooping it up?

At at least one of these events, there was discussion/leak about how they were recruiting those details based specifically on traits that would indicate they would behave in such a way as to show support. This happened/happens against normal military procedures, and also the constitution and Hatch Act.

 

[SLD]

Breaking: Trump Used AI to Scan U.S. Generals’ Faces for Loyalty — and to Root Out Whistleblowers

On the Jewish Day of Atonement, America Must Reckon With a President Who Never Repents

levremembers.substack.com

So the real reason that Trump called the meeting was to use AI to determine who would disobey orders. Every eyebrow raised was scanned and noted.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

I used to be against the draft. Now I’ve reconsidered. We don’t need a professional military, we need a citizen one. One where its leaders can’t be sure that the ranks will simply obey their orders. We need a military made up of people who are not concerned with making the military a career, but are willing to serve their country and take the oath to the Constitution for a period of time.

The draft eliminates that word I have highlighted.

You have a citizen military, made up of people who are willing to serve their country and take the oath to the Constitution for a period of time.

Of course those people are also "concerned with making the military a career", but you can't avoid that without taking away the "willing to", and replacing it with "told to".

I started a thread awhile back about how the draft needs to be reinstated, but it didn't get a lot of interest. Despite that, I still believe the draft is needed.

It's one thing to have your young adult child shipped off to X Hellhole when they've 100% made the decision to do so. It's quite another when your young adult child is taken from college and shipped off to the same Hellhole. One causes heartbreak, the other cause heartbreak AND outrage among the family, the drafted soldier, and the young people who are potential draftees.

The all volunteer army means that the minimum number of people have skin in the game. It's easy to get on board with any military action when you and yours have nothing to lose.

It was Nixon who led the charge to get rid of the draft. He did so because he hoped it would quell protests. It's worked perfectly.

Afghanistan for 20 years? Iraq for 20 years? No problem!

Finally, young people are very loud on the internet but they don't vote. Maybe if they faced boot camp and potential combat they might decide that filling out a ballot might be worth not playing Elden Ring for half an hour.

 

[SLD]

Trump administration officials seriously discussing invoking Insurrection Act, sources say

A decision isn't expected to be imminent, one source said, but debate within the administration has shifted recently to more deeply exploring how and when the act might be invoked.

www.nbcnews.com

Now he says that he’ll use the insurrection act. That will destroy the military.

 

[Elixir]

Trump administration officials seriously discussing invoking Insurrection Act, sources say

A decision isn't expected to be imminent, one source said, but debate within the administration has shifted recently to more deeply exploring how and when the act might be invoked.

www.nbcnews.com

Now he says that he’ll use the insurrection act. That will destroy the military.

OF COURSE he will use the insurrection act. It will probably not be until it is too late for SCROTUS to rule until after the election though … nothing in the Constitution is going to stop this malaised orange madman. Neither is his own junta, unless he appoints RFK Jr as his personal physician.

 

[laughing dog]

Where is there an insurrection? Trump refused to call in the National Guard when there was an actual insurrection, so I’d think the courts may not look kindly on this.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Where is there an insurrection? Trump refused to call in the National Guard when there was an actual insurrection, so I’d think the courts may not look kindly on this.

Oh no… not the courts… they will have an unkind look…. That’ll teach that bully…

</dripping sarcasm>

 

[Terrell]

Sounds like disciplinary issues waiting to happen. You're forcing millions of people who don't want to be there, may have better options, or both to do military service. It's when and how many, not if, people aren't going to be willing to play ball. Not to mention most 18 year olds are not qualified to be in the military.

Military Times article

At least some of these people will have talents that can be put to better use elsewhere, you're delaying their ability to do so. It's also going to cost a bunch of money, those people have physical needs, that will cost tax dollars to fulfill, and those people are going to want paychecks. They're not going to be happy if they could get higher pay elsewhere and are barred from doing so.

Many disciplinary issues stem from supervisors letting the small things go, the stuff that doesn't warrant action by the commanding officer. People with disciplinary issues or just bad attitudes will have them no matter where they are or what they are doing.

If we want a qualified pool of individuals, mandatory registration and calling up a portion of them as needed will do. Affects to careers that are put on hold can be mitigated by law just as there are laws in place now to protect service members and their family financially. Remember, for the vast majority of the human population, careers in the hard sciences are not going to be disrupted. Most people are just filling cubicles.

Plenty of countries have mandatory conscription Switzerland, Norway, Greece and Finland which I'm told is the happiest place on earth. Finland is six months to a year. That's a high turnover rate and they seem to find the money for it.

Peoples perception of the military must largely come from movies, that there needs to be some warrior attitude to serve. Or maybe it's piss poor marketing on the part of the military. It floors me that people willingly take on a mountain of student loan debt that will take them on average 20 years to pay off when for three years of active duty between high school and college the government would pay for it all for four years and provide a monthly tax free allowance along the way. Here that allowance would be about $1400, in Southern California, about $4000. For most, this is way better than mom and dad can do.

Disciplinary issues aren't going to go away by being more strict; it might make it worse. The issue I'm talking about is resistance from the people who don't want to be there. Some portion of them will do just enough to keep their immediate supervisor off their ass, usually a Staff Sergeant or Tech Sergeant (USAF ranks). Not their best work, just enough to stay out of trouble for a 4 year enlistment, plus an IRR component. Others will actively do stupid shit that might require the 1st Sergeant or the CO to be involved.

No amount of laws will remove the "I don't want to be here" problem that will occur with any type of conscription.

I know what it's like to be in the USAF in the 1990s. I know that most people don't see combat, I had an office job. I'm also aware of the GI bill from that era as well.

Mandatory military service may not have anything to do with those countries' citizens' happiness. That whole correlation/causation thing.

As for recruiting, military recruiters are allowed in all high schools and colleges in the USA by federal law. LIke the article I liked earlier, most teens and young adults aren't qualified for the military. Many that are, aren't interested. Ads on TV, national anthem at most, if not all, sports events, flyovers at some sports events, pledge every day in many schools. Some places even give discounts to active duty, and/or veterans. It's not for lack of recruitment effort.

Money, about 4.2 million kids were born in 2007. They turn(ed) 18 this year. That's more than all branches of the military combined, including guard and reserves. If some are being conscripted, and others are not, resentment will build among the conscripted.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr58/nvsr58_24.pdf

A few years ago Beau of the 5th Column made a video on his channel "The Roads with Beau" called "The Roads to the Draft". It describes the other things the U.S. military would try before they'd resort to the draft, because they don't want draftees. His wife now runs the channel so it's been renamed "Belle of the Ranch"

 

[TV and credit cards]

Sounds like disciplinary issues waiting to happen. You're forcing millions of people who don't want to be there, may have better options, or both to do military service. It's when and how many, not if, people aren't going to be willing to play ball. Not to mention most 18 year olds are not qualified to be in the military.

Military Times article

At least some of these people will have talents that can be put to better use elsewhere, you're delaying their ability to do so. It's also going to cost a bunch of money, those people have physical needs, that will cost tax dollars to fulfill, and those people are going to want paychecks. They're not going to be happy if they could get higher pay elsewhere and are barred from doing so.

Many disciplinary issues stem from supervisors letting the small things go, the stuff that doesn't warrant action by the commanding officer. People with disciplinary issues or just bad attitudes will have them no matter where they are or what they are doing.

If we want a qualified pool of individuals, mandatory registration and calling up a portion of them as needed will do. Affects to careers that are put on hold can be mitigated by law just as there are laws in place now to protect service members and their family financially. Remember, for the vast majority of the human population, careers in the hard sciences are not going to be disrupted. Most people are just filling cubicles.

Plenty of countries have mandatory conscription Switzerland, Norway, Greece and Finland which I'm told is the happiest place on earth. Finland is six months to a year. That's a high turnover rate and they seem to find the money for it.

Peoples perception of the military must largely come from movies, that there needs to be some warrior attitude to serve. Or maybe it's piss poor marketing on the part of the military. It floors me that people willingly take on a mountain of student loan debt that will take them on average 20 years to pay off when for three years of active duty between high school and college the government would pay for it all for four years and provide a monthly tax free allowance along the way. Here that allowance would be about $1400, in Southern California, about $4000. For most, this is way better than mom and dad can do.

Disciplinary issues aren't going to go away by being more strict; it might make it worse. The issue I'm talking about is resistance from the people who don't want to be there. Some portion of them will do just enough to keep their immediate supervisor off their ass, usually a Staff Sergeant or Tech Sergeant (USAF ranks). Not their best work, just enough to stay out of trouble for a 4 year enlistment, plus an IRR component. Others will actively do stupid shit that might require the 1st Sergeant or the CO to be involved.

No amount of laws will remove the "I don't want to be here" problem that will occur with any type of conscription.

I know what it's like to be in the USAF in the 1990s. I know that most people don't see combat, I had an office job. I'm also aware of the GI bill from that era as well.

Mandatory military service may not have anything to do with those countries' citizens' happiness. That whole correlation/causation thing.

As for recruiting, military recruiters are allowed in all high schools and colleges in the USA by federal law. LIke the article I liked earlier, most teens and young adults aren't qualified for the military. Many that are, aren't interested. Ads on TV, national anthem at most, if not all, sports events, flyovers at some sports events, pledge every day in many schools. Some places even give discounts to active duty, and/or veterans. It's not for lack of recruitment effort.

Money, about 4.2 million kids were born in 2007. They turn(ed) 18 this year. That's more than all branches of the military combined, including guard and reserves. If some are being conscripted, and others are not, resentment will build among the conscripted.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr58/nvsr58_24.pdf

Deleted Beau. I watched half of it, up until the movement of service members between units or services, also known as "individual augmentation". To this point he was telling me nothing new and his slow way of putting out information grates on my nerves.

Most people will make the best of a situation they cannot change. In a study, 60% college students said as much about the pandemic. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say being drafted for XX months/years isn't as bad as enduring a pandemic of unknown duration. I can't access the full study itself, just an abstract and article referencing it.
People who would complain or do the least amount of work to skate by are mostly people who will do so in any situation. A bad attitude is a character trait more often than a trigger for having to do something one does not want to.
I think you're coming at this from solely a perspective of a change over from an all volunteer force to a conscription model. In this, you are correct. There will be problems but as time passes and graduating high school students know of no other system, it will be accepted as just part of life. This is evidenced by the Finnish model which is widely accepted by the general population. A population that feels more a sense of duty to their country than themself. We should be so lucky. Individualism tears at the fabric of society.

 

[Terrell]

Sounds like disciplinary issues waiting to happen. You're forcing millions of people who don't want to be there, may have better options, or both to do military service. It's when and how many, not if, people aren't going to be willing to play ball. Not to mention most 18 year olds are not qualified to be in the military.

Military Times article

At least some of these people will have talents that can be put to better use elsewhere, you're delaying their ability to do so. It's also going to cost a bunch of money, those people have physical needs, that will cost tax dollars to fulfill, and those people are going to want paychecks. They're not going to be happy if they could get higher pay elsewhere and are barred from doing so.

Many disciplinary issues stem from supervisors letting the small things go, the stuff that doesn't warrant action by the commanding officer. People with disciplinary issues or just bad attitudes will have them no matter where they are or what they are doing.

If we want a qualified pool of individuals, mandatory registration and calling up a portion of them as needed will do. Affects to careers that are put on hold can be mitigated by law just as there are laws in place now to protect service members and their family financially. Remember, for the vast majority of the human population, careers in the hard sciences are not going to be disrupted. Most people are just filling cubicles.

Plenty of countries have mandatory conscription Switzerland, Norway, Greece and Finland which I'm told is the happiest place on earth. Finland is six months to a year. That's a high turnover rate and they seem to find the money for it.

Peoples perception of the military must largely come from movies, that there needs to be some warrior attitude to serve. Or maybe it's piss poor marketing on the part of the military. It floors me that people willingly take on a mountain of student loan debt that will take them on average 20 years to pay off when for three years of active duty between high school and college the government would pay for it all for four years and provide a monthly tax free allowance along the way. Here that allowance would be about $1400, in Southern California, about $4000. For most, this is way better than mom and dad can do.

Disciplinary issues aren't going to go away by being more strict; it might make it worse. The issue I'm talking about is resistance from the people who don't want to be there. Some portion of them will do just enough to keep their immediate supervisor off their ass, usually a Staff Sergeant or Tech Sergeant (USAF ranks). Not their best work, just enough to stay out of trouble for a 4 year enlistment, plus an IRR component. Others will actively do stupid shit that might require the 1st Sergeant or the CO to be involved.

No amount of laws will remove the "I don't want to be here" problem that will occur with any type of conscription.

I know what it's like to be in the USAF in the 1990s. I know that most people don't see combat, I had an office job. I'm also aware of the GI bill from that era as well.

Mandatory military service may not have anything to do with those countries' citizens' happiness. That whole correlation/causation thing.

As for recruiting, military recruiters are allowed in all high schools and colleges in the USA by federal law. LIke the article I liked earlier, most teens and young adults aren't qualified for the military. Many that are, aren't interested. Ads on TV, national anthem at most, if not all, sports events, flyovers at some sports events, pledge every day in many schools. Some places even give discounts to active duty, and/or veterans. It's not for lack of recruitment effort.

Money, about 4.2 million kids were born in 2007. They turn(ed) 18 this year. That's more than all branches of the military combined, including guard and reserves. If some are being conscripted, and others are not, resentment will build among the conscripted.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr58/nvsr58_24.pdf

Deleted Beau. I watched half of it, up until the movement of service members between units or services, also known as "individual augmentation". To this point he was telling me nothing new and his slow way of putting out information grates on my nerves.

Most people will make the best of a situation they cannot change. In a study, 60% college students said as much about the pandemic. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say being drafted for XX months/years isn't as bad as enduring a pandemic of unknown duration. I can't access the full study itself, just an abstract and article referencing it.
People who would complain or do the least amount of work to skate by are mostly people who will do so in any situation. A bad attitude is a character trait more often than a trigger for having to do something one does not want to.
I think you're coming at this from solely a perspective of a change over from an all volunteer force to a conscription model. In this, you are correct. There will be problems but as time passes and graduating high school students know of no other system, it will be accepted as just part of life. This is evidenced by the Finnish model which is widely accepted by the general population. A population that feels more a sense of duty to their country than themself. We should be so lucky. Individualism tears at the fabric of society.

And what of those who don't? They're a potential problem. The military doesn't want to deal with them. Not to mention if you court-martial them and give them Bad Conduct/Dishonorable discharges you now have a new felon on the streets after he gets out of military prison. They're going to have fewer employment options than had they simply been left alone.

Do you really want people who will just skate by when important things, possibly lives, are at stake?

You don't know that a person that will skate in one situation will necessarily skate in another. People might skate on something they feel is a chore, but might excel in something they feel strongly about. Passion means something with regards to individual behavior.

The Finnish model is accepted by the citizens of Finland. Finland is not the United States of America. We're different, culturally, from them. You have a threat on your border in Russia. They don't have the logistics to take and occupy the USA, especially the Lower 48.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Sounds like disciplinary issues waiting to happen. You're forcing millions of people who don't want to be there, may have better options, or both to do military service. It's when and how many, not if, people aren't going to be willing to play ball. Not to mention most 18 year olds are not qualified to be in the military.

Military Times article

At least some of these people will have talents that can be put to better use elsewhere, you're delaying their ability to do so. It's also going to cost a bunch of money, those people have physical needs, that will cost tax dollars to fulfill, and those people are going to want paychecks. They're not going to be happy if they could get higher pay elsewhere and are barred from doing so.

Many disciplinary issues stem from supervisors letting the small things go, the stuff that doesn't warrant action by the commanding officer. People with disciplinary issues or just bad attitudes will have them no matter where they are or what they are doing.

If we want a qualified pool of individuals, mandatory registration and calling up a portion of them as needed will do. Affects to careers that are put on hold can be mitigated by law just as there are laws in place now to protect service members and their family financially. Remember, for the vast majority of the human population, careers in the hard sciences are not going to be disrupted. Most people are just filling cubicles.

Plenty of countries have mandatory conscription Switzerland, Norway, Greece and Finland which I'm told is the happiest place on earth. Finland is six months to a year. That's a high turnover rate and they seem to find the money for it.

Peoples perception of the military must largely come from movies, that there needs to be some warrior attitude to serve. Or maybe it's piss poor marketing on the part of the military. It floors me that people willingly take on a mountain of student loan debt that will take them on average 20 years to pay off when for three years of active duty between high school and college the government would pay for it all for four years and provide a monthly tax free allowance along the way. Here that allowance would be about $1400, in Southern California, about $4000. For most, this is way better than mom and dad can do.

Disciplinary issues aren't going to go away by being more strict; it might make it worse. The issue I'm talking about is resistance from the people who don't want to be there. Some portion of them will do just enough to keep their immediate supervisor off their ass, usually a Staff Sergeant or Tech Sergeant (USAF ranks). Not their best work, just enough to stay out of trouble for a 4 year enlistment, plus an IRR component. Others will actively do stupid shit that might require the 1st Sergeant or the CO to be involved.

No amount of laws will remove the "I don't want to be here" problem that will occur with any type of conscription.

I know what it's like to be in the USAF in the 1990s. I know that most people don't see combat, I had an office job. I'm also aware of the GI bill from that era as well.

Mandatory military service may not have anything to do with those countries' citizens' happiness. That whole correlation/causation thing.

As for recruiting, military recruiters are allowed in all high schools and colleges in the USA by federal law. LIke the article I liked earlier, most teens and young adults aren't qualified for the military. Many that are, aren't interested. Ads on TV, national anthem at most, if not all, sports events, flyovers at some sports events, pledge every day in many schools. Some places even give discounts to active duty, and/or veterans. It's not for lack of recruitment effort.

Money, about 4.2 million kids were born in 2007. They turn(ed) 18 this year. That's more than all branches of the military combined, including guard and reserves. If some are being conscripted, and others are not, resentment will build among the conscripted.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr58/nvsr58_24.pdf

Deleted Beau. I watched half of it, up until the movement of service members between units or services, also known as "individual augmentation". To this point he was telling me nothing new and his slow way of putting out information grates on my nerves.

Most people will make the best of a situation they cannot change. In a study, 60% college students said as much about the pandemic. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say being drafted for XX months/years isn't as bad as enduring a pandemic of unknown duration. I can't access the full study itself, just an abstract and article referencing it.
People who would complain or do the least amount of work to skate by are mostly people who will do so in any situation. A bad attitude is a character trait more often than a trigger for having to do something one does not want to.
I think you're coming at this from solely a perspective of a change over from an all volunteer force to a conscription model. In this, you are correct. There will be problems but as time passes and graduating high school students know of no other system, it will be accepted as just part of life. This is evidenced by the Finnish model which is widely accepted by the general population. A population that feels more a sense of duty to their country than themself. We should be so lucky. Individualism tears at the fabric of society.

And what of those who don't? They're a potential problem. The military doesn't want to deal with them. Not to mention if you court-martial them and give them Bad Conduct/Dishonorable discharges you now have a new felon on the streets after he gets out of military prison. They're going to have fewer employment options than had they simply been left alone.

Do you really want people who will just skate by when important things, possibly lives, are at stake?

You don't know that a person that will skate in one situation will necessarily skate in another. People might skate on something they feel is a chore, but might excel in something they feel strongly about. Passion means something with regards to individual behavior.

The Finnish model is accepted by the citizens of Finland. Finland is not the United States of America. We're different, culturally, from them. You have a threat on your border in Russia. They don't have the logistics to take and occupy the USA, especially the Lower 48.

I think "those who don't" will be a small percentage and decrease in time as conscription becomes the norm in society. To end up at a court martial a person basically has to commit a crime eligible for a lengthy prison sentence. All other offenses a commanding officer can judge and punish: non-judicial or NJP.
Percentages of discharges that are punitive are rare. Dishonorable .07%, Bad Conduct .49%, Other Than Honorable 2.09%. Only these will lose a person their VA benefits (GI Bill) and still will be judged by the VA on a case by case basis depending on what if any trauma the individual may have suffered in the past.

And for that subset so vehemently opposed to serving in the military, willing to risk it all to stand on principle, I would suggest service in the Peace Corp or similar be qualifying. They can maintain fire roads or perform trail maintenance in the Sierra Nevada Mountains working for the US Forest Service. That's a real character builder and would be most deserving of qualifying for the GI Bill.

Yes, Finland has a mad dog for a neighbor. Their conscription service was born out of this necessity. But it is culturally accepted. As far as I know, has always been accepted for this very reason. As time passes I think there can be cultural acceptance of having to perform some service to country in one form or another. It would rein in individualism and teach people the difference between patriotism and nationalism.