If they are old enough to die for their country they are old enough to vote

If it's OK for governments to send young people at ages 16 and 17 into war zones then there is no moral argument for not allowing them the opportunity to elect the government which may send them to their deaths or otherwise.

The way to engage young people in politics is at school and votes for 16 will bring that forward

16 to 17 year olds can choose whether or It's not they want okay to join.(unless there is a draft that low)People have send people under the right age of 18 to choose to defend their rights, their home, their lives, and their country. The war. People can enlist in the army does not mind at all extra people, because they help. Voting does not, however because too many people who cant make good decisions will ruin that age, but the majority of what people truly want . They are army is not mature enough allowed to vote. It requires research. They dont have send them into combat. [1] 
 
[1} 
The optional protocol on the time with decisions such as this. Choosing their future career.Doing exams for highschool, marriage, moving out involvement of their parents house. They dont have children in armed conflict to the time. They also need an abiltiy Convention that came into force in 2002 stipulates that its state parties “shall take all feasible measures to make their own decisions not to agree with everything people say and go with ensure that persons below the person who has made the most recent point. . Also, at this young age of an age, teens will talk to their friends, see their points 18 do not take a direct part in hostilities and most likely agree with them and choose the same candidate or decision. Many things that they are supposed to be taken not compulsorily recruited into account on this matter.their armed forces.” 
 
Source: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/mar2007/chld-m08.shtml