They cannot be debated, convinced or persuaded.
They can only be vanquished.
I just want to get in on this. The Times (and their credulous readers) are putting military service, and only in this case, into the perspective of doing time in order to get something - sort of like prison and potentially worse. Actually, the military has it's own demographic, as it is it's own culture. The rewards are so much greater than just college tuition for anyone who chooses to commit AFTER signing up, whether they stay for three years or beyond twenty. Their background stays in the past. I think the Times is trying to say that it is "welfare with chem suits and a gun" - a new societal abuse.