Conclusion
To what extent was the use of boy soldiers during World War I justified?
The use of boy soldiers during World War One was justified to a great extent.
The use of boy soldiers during World War One was justified to a great extent.
Although there were both advantages and disadvantages to the employment of boy soldiers during World War One, I believe that the use of boy soldiers during World War One was justified to a great extent because of the following reasons:
1. Children were volunteering to join the army. They were willing to fight for their country. This was a choice they had made themselves, thus it is impossible to reproach recruitment officers about forcing children into war.
2. They were just as enthusiastic about the war as adults were, and sometimes even more. They had a passion for fighting.
3. Children were sometimes/often just as talented as adult soldiers, to the extent that an army officer wrote to a boy soldier's mother that he was just as competent as his adult counterparts and that he recommended him to stay if he desired to do so.
4. They caused more benefits than harm. It was always better to have too many than not enough soldiers, although there were never too many soldiers during WWI.
1. Children were volunteering to join the army. They were willing to fight for their country. This was a choice they had made themselves, thus it is impossible to reproach recruitment officers about forcing children into war.
2. They were just as enthusiastic about the war as adults were, and sometimes even more. They had a passion for fighting.
3. Children were sometimes/often just as talented as adult soldiers, to the extent that an army officer wrote to a boy soldier's mother that he was just as competent as his adult counterparts and that he recommended him to stay if he desired to do so.
4. They caused more benefits than harm. It was always better to have too many than not enough soldiers, although there were never too many soldiers during WWI.