It wasn't always this way. The drinking age in the United States was raised to 21 in the 1980s, in an attempt to prevent highway fatalities. Soldiers really didn't come into it.

Honestly, I do see merit in the argument that lowering the drinking age will help curb binge drinking; on the other hand, though, people are drinking as early as middle school. It'll push it earlier, in other words. If the drinking age becomes 18, everything will just go back a couple years and you'll have the same situation -- well, the same situation with even younger, even less responsible people.

And it doesn't help that a lot of the most vocal supporters of lowering the drinking age are people under 21 who want to drink. That's not an argument.

Traditionally, one of the perks of joining the military at a young age was that you got to drink with the adults, and in most parts of the world that's still the case.

In north America, most Legions will server you regardless of age if you just show your service identification.

This may sound simplistic, but the old platitude: if you're old enough to die for your country, you're old enough to drink; I think holds true. I don't mean that the drinking age should be lowered in the U.S, but I do see special dispensation being given to active service members regarding the acquisition of alcoholic beverages.

The matter of age is not the concern when it comes to children drinking. If they want alcohol they will find it somewhere. Whether a parent's liquor cabinet or an older person buying it, kids find a way to get their hands on beer and liquor. This is why there are so many kids still getting drunk.

As for whether a military person should be able to buy alcohol I feel if he or she can take a bullet for me then I should be able to buy them a shot.

Most military personnel already have access to alcohol even in the United States. The commander of each base is allowed to make that decision whether someone under the age of 21 is allowed to drink or not if the base is located within 50 miles of Canada or Mexico or if the state where the installation is located has a lower age.

http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/IntheNews/UnderageDrinking/1106156025.html

I would personally let an 18-year-old soldier drink, but the mentality behind it, I believe, is that alcohol can damage a brain that isn't done developing, and an 18-year-old's brain still has a long way to go. Of course, some research says your brain isn't really done developing until 25, and other research says that war trauma can damage the brain anyway.

So, I guess, why not let them drink?

Personally, I think the age to join the military should be raised. Who can make a responsible decision about something as serious as going to war at 18 years old?

When my dad was stationed in Germany they were allowed to drink at 18. As a dependent, I was also allowed to not only purchase alcohol on base and drink when I turned 18, I also bartended at the Rod & Gun Club. Imagine my horror when he retired stateside and I was only 20. No more doing anything.

But I think statewide, everyone agrees that soldiers should be allowed to drink. I don't remember ever seeing a soldier being carded and turned down nor would I like to be the person that sees a military ID and won't serve a soldier. If you can see the things they see, be away from their families, sacrifice their lives, then hell yeah they can make the decision to have a beer. I agree with the previous poster that maybe the age to enter the service should be raised. The things they go through and experience are more harmful to an 18 year old then a beer could ever be, again JMHO.

The main reasons for young adults not being allowed to drink until they have reached the age of 21 years, actually include physiological aspects. After research has shown that the human brain is not fully developed until age 21, laws were changed and young people were not allowed to purchase or consume alcoholic beverage before their 21st birthday. Therefore, according to the American Medical Association, early alcohol consumption can stem brain development and cause permanent damage to certain areas of the brain in youngsters or young adults that have not reached the age of 21. Many youths who consumed alcohol prematurely have been found to experience problems with memory, learning, reasoning, and decision-making, as these were the primary brain areas affected by early alcohol consumption. Further, youngsters who started drinking prior to turning 15 years old are up to 5 times more likely to develop alcoholism than those who do not start drinking until after age 21. Since soldiers are anatomically and physiologically similar in their development to other same-age individuals who are not enlisted in the military, their soldier status cannot protect them from potentially experiencing negative effects of early alcohol consumption. Yes, we generally look at soldiers as heroes, which of course they are for sacrificing their own wellbeing and parts of their lives (that could be spent with their family) to go to war or serve abroad, but soldiers as persons are no different from other people around them. Would it be justified to say, for example, that a teenage mom should be allowed to drink alcohol prematurely just because she has had a child and now has “grown-up” responsibilities? As sad as it is, I have heard this claim before (“I’ve had a baby, but yet I’m not allowed to drink yet”).
Of course, other countries may look at this issue somewhat differently. As was mentioned already, soldiers stationed in countries, such as Germany, are allowed to drink before the age of 21. My husband actually came to Germany when he first joined the military and was surprised that at the tender age of 18, all his fellow soldiers were drinking heavily every weekend. The legal drinking age itself is different in Germany. From age 16 on youths are allowed one alcoholic beverage, mostly beer, at a public event and are allowed to purchase this drink themselves as long as they can fabricate ID. From 18 years on, young adults are allowed to purchase and drink alcohol. This may seem to conflict with the medical findings mentioned earlier that have attributed potential irreversible brain damage to early drinking. However, some medical claims have also been made in favor of moderate drinking (one or two drinks a day) and although I am not familiar with the appropriate age for this type of drinking behavior, this may be part of the reasoning behind letting young people drink before age 21 in other countries. At the same time, the drinking behavior (in Germany, for example) overall differs greatly from that of the United States. I have grown up in Germany and although we do have binge-drinkers as well, many people do consume alcohol more moderately (i.e. a glass of beer or wine with their meals) than people here in the US, who may drink more soft drinks when out to eat but then binge on the weekends, far exceeding the recommended amount of alcohol intake that may be considered non-damaging or even beneficial. Therefore, when it comes to drinking overall, moderation is definitely key. However, when it comes to underage drinking, I think preventative measures would be more effective than chancing it that youngsters will make the right decisions to stop drinking after one or two drinks or to act rationally in an impaired condition.
A not-so-fun little fact by the DHHS is that –quote- “Alcohol kills 6.5 times more young people under the age of 21 than all other illicit drugs combined” –end quote-. This scary statistic should be an eye-opener for all who advocate underage drinking.

I agree quite simply with the question and the top answer given. Yes, if kids want beer, they'll get it come hell or high water! But, no, it shouldn't be right for 18 year olds to DIE for US, and not DRINK for THEIR enjoyment.

Tis' just not fair!