A soldier recently died of a heart attack after receiving a smallpox vaccine. The previously mandatory anthrax vaccinations led to some alleged health problems as well as military members withdrawing from the service. Should vaccines, in particular the ones which are regarded as 'experimental', be obligatory for military service?

I would say not, although this is a tough call. After all, isn't military service all about obeying orders? (One reason I never want to be in the armed forces.) But even so, this seems to be more a matter of one's own body and safety. If it could be shown that failure to be vaccinated was causing a danger to others, I can see that it might be enforced.

Quite the contrary of protecting others, the vaccines often seem to be a danger to the receivers. Gulf war illness might be vaccine related. I know many military members who went to the Gulf war in the 90s who were injected with numerous mysterious vaccines. One pilot told me they injected some sort of gel under the skin of his thigh that took a couple of days to dissolve. He assumed that it was to combat a chemical weapon attack.
The way it stands now, if a soldier refuses an experimental vaccine, they could be not only discharged, but face courts martial. It isn't unheard of to send a military member off to fight, and make them face a trial for refusing to take the vaccine when (if?) they come home. Yet, the benefits of some have not been proven. There is actually little evidence that a smallpox or anthrax vaccine would work against the manufactured biological weapon variety of organisms.

It's true soldiers are supposed to follow orders, but if the order calls for an unnecessary risk to their personal health, and the program is extremely suspect, should it stand?

Thanks for the information. I think you make a good case.