Freebird Games Community

Community (Misc.) => General => Debates/Serious Discussions => Topic started by: Eli on February 28, 2014, 11:27:37 AM

Title: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Eli on February 28, 2014, 11:27:37 AM
"A Fat Kid (http://freebirdgames.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=10810)" is going to military service and my opinion that military service should not be mandatory seems to have a potential for debates.
Since I started the debate in his farewell topic I feel guilty for hijacking the topic so I started a new one in this section.
Here is what I said that started it:
Quote from: Ali
I hope one day military service would no longer be mandatory in any country.

Here are the replies up to this point:
I on the other hand think there should be at least some for (like 1-2 years) of compulsory service. It teaches discipline, respect, order and safety.

It teaches discipline, respect, order and safety.

You forgot to mention drinking.

I don't really drink so I wouldn't know Kyo.

I don't drink either. But I know what they do in my country's military service.

Is that so? Poland is most secretive military power in Europe I couldn't even found their current issue cammies.


In my opinion it really depends on the country and different military bases that you may be assigned to, from what I hear of those who finished their military service in my country, there was everything but discipline, respect, order and safety.

But even if it teaches discipline, respect, order and safety, should it be mandatory?
Should we expect everyone to agree to our definition of discipline, respect, order and safety?
Even if everybody agrees that something is good for you, should it be mandatory?
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Miss Nile on February 28, 2014, 02:32:49 PM
Of course it has to be. At least in my opinion. Sure, it teaches respect, discipline, order and safety but other than that, it teaches you the morals of the importance of your country, your home and builds within you a meaning of special love and sacrifice for your people and flag.

Consider that the country suddenly goes into war and needs to recruit more men for its forces, at least those who'd been through it before wouldn't be completely clueless about weapons and how things work. In the very least, it would save time and effort in the time of need because you'd have previously-trained soldiers, you wouldn't need to teach them all over again.

I know that it's a hassle for most men to have 1 or 2 years of their life obligatory into the military service, and some, if not at all, would rather do something else more useful to them in that time, but really, one year or two isn't that much if it could save your country one day.

Just my two cents. :3
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: atommo on February 28, 2014, 03:32:45 PM
I never knew military service was mandatory in other parts of Europe O_O In the UK you don't have to.

Also,
it teaches you the morals of the importance of your country, your home and builds within you a meaning of special love and sacrifice for your people and flag.

Some people may not think quite the same way. I mean, my mum's dad was forced into the army during WWII and I'm pretty sure it was a very rough time. According to my mum, whenever the war was brought up he'd avoid talking about it. It really is controversial to me.

The thing is, I don't agree with forcing people to do something if they really don't want to, especially when there's such a real chance of death. I sure wouldn't like dying in a war I didn't agree with in the first place. However, at the same time, like in WWII, if no-one fought, the UK would most likely have fallen to the nazis, and I'm sure lots of people wouldn't have liked that.

Then again, it must've been the same on the German side too. Lots of people were forced to fight even though they didn't want to, and you end up with the tragic scene of people reluctantly killing each other for no personal reason, but because some guy at the top is making them.

For me, I would ideally only want to fight if I agreed with the cause, which I probably wouldn't in most cases. Generally, it is more effective to settle things through peaceful means, with fighting being a last resort.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Just Lance on February 28, 2014, 05:07:50 PM
Atommo when in a large scale conflict like the Second World War was many countries ordered compulsory service. Many governments still have the power to do so if there is a need. Also by having compulsory service does not necessarily mean you must go and fight a war. There are many positions within the military that do not require you to hold a rifle. Most often overlooked ones are mechanics, engineer and generally people that supply the fighting branches of the military and the guys and gals from motor pools.
For example a great lad Tan who I consider a friend is an ex-USAF EMT who was stationed in Yokohama base in Japan never had to have a weapon outside small arms training.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Eli on February 28, 2014, 05:47:56 PM
I agree with most of the points atommo made.

Miss Nile, by forced conscription I will never gain love for the flag, I find the flag just a tool, a symbol that is used for distinction.
I know many people have special feelings about their flag, etc. and I respect those people, but I'm not one of them.
And about the possibility of a sudden war, my hope is to reach a point that a sudden war is not possible anymore. We both live in middle east and a sudden war is very real to us, but by playing an integral role in global economy and politics hopefully one day that sudden war would be as distant to us as it is to many european countries now, those same countries that fought in World Wars.
I'm not saying that militaries should be abandoned, the current state of the world is certainly not ready for it, but militaries should consist of people who voluntarily join them.
And please note that in some countries mandatory military service is for women too. I find it sexist that some countries only conscript men, but I think in this case sexism is better than forcing both men and women.

Just Lance, are not those positions limited? And lets say my expertise is not needed, do I still have a choice?
And what if my expertise is needed but I decide to not fix weapons (just an example) that are used by the soldiers to kill?
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Miss Nile on February 28, 2014, 06:23:21 PM
Ali, we both know that not having a sudden war start anytime, and depending more on politics and economy, as beautiful as that dream is, won't become real anytime soon. For the meantime, you have to act to protect yourself as you must and as you can.

I differ with you on the flag thing-I only meant it as a symbol of the love of your country, your people, anything special about your land. Myself, I believe it's part of who we are to love our home countries no matter how horrible they are. And part of that love is to be ready to sacrifice your life to protect it.

Of course, being forced to enter military won't make you love your country any better, but I believe it would at least build inside you certain morals towards respect and sacrifice not only towards your country but also generally.

As for not joining a war that you're not convinced of or you don't want to fight in, who ever wants to fight in a war? But let's say that your country is suddenly attacked and endangered by an enemy; how many would sit home and prefer not to fight? Wouldn't that necessarily mean the defeat of this land?

And I know that death and tragedies are of course quite possible to happen here but that's to be expected whenever military and wars are mentioned.

As for sexism, Ali, I think it's got to do with religions more than sexism between men and women. ^^
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: ~ on February 28, 2014, 06:47:47 PM
I don't believe compulsory service is necessary at all in any developed nation. Discipline, respect, order and safety are things that a reasonable parent should teach their child, not a drill instructor. It's an outdated concept rooted from expansionist imperialism, something very alien in the 21st century. To many youths, it's just a disruptive waste of time.

I'd also like to think that one day there wouldn't be a need for compulsory service in any country - ideally, there wouldn't be armed forces to begin with. Of course that's unlikely to happen anytime soon.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Just Lance on March 01, 2014, 05:38:51 PM
You know I've heard too many stories of people being stupid and blowing his or her brain out because of mishandling a firearm. I know a lot of those where they were more fortunate and ended up with something like partial castration or a hole in the leg. So don't make me to stress the importance of safety.
Damn I've even seen a teen kid that took his parents 1911 took it to a bathroom cocked with round in the chamber and safety off he manipulated this gun in his left hand (that means without access to firearms control levers) in front of a camera EVEN DOWN THE FREAKING BARREL! I was glad I had not my 75 on my belt because I was sure grabbing for it when I literary saw inside of a loaded .45.
One thing I would never EVER do is pointing my gun loaded or unloaded even totally empty with a slide back on somebody without a proper reason to shoot that person.

"As long as humans exist, there will be weapons in this world. And we are better off with knowing how to use them and apply them for the right reasons than not knowing how to use them."
Dom Raso US Navy SEALs

Talking about a world where we don't need military is a nice picture but is about as real as My Little Pony. As long as there will be radicals of any religious, political or philosophical believe there will be people willing to slaughter innocent in some twisted way how to prove their ideals are the "might right" and who to oppose them than a military force?

In case there is a threat to the country with whch a standing military force can't cope with there will be need for a new recruits and even though skills like these are perishable they are much more easier to remind than teach them anew.
Just because we made something faster bigger/smaller stronger does not mean we have "evolved" in some miraculous way.

Talking about "peaceful Europe"? Well look again... Kosovo, Yugoslavia, right now Ukraine they are very real and very close conflicts of now and recent past. People there were/are scared and massacred without a proper means of response or defence. If the military is working for an oppressive regime if you went through at least a basic military training you know what to do under fire you won't chicken you won't run out in the open for a sniper to smoke you out of existence, but you will seek cover and might even rescue some people in the process.

So yeah by having a compulsory military training you might actually use that training to free yourself and your countrymen from an oppressive regime.
Is it still such a bad idea?
I dunno how about you but I think spending two years learning how warfare works is better for me than getting a 7.62 bullet from 200 meters away just because I was running in the open instead of taking cover.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Tumbles on March 01, 2014, 06:33:28 PM
The military teaches respect and discipline in the same way that pottery classes teach the importance of pottery. Pottery classes should be mandatory.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: ~ on March 02, 2014, 04:44:36 AM
Lance said stuff.

If your biggest points in arguing for mandatory service are firearm safety and basic military training, then I guess the importance of military service really depends on where you are in the world and how likely it is your country will become an instant war zone.

I don't believe this is likely to happen in any stable and developed country. I can only speak from my perspective in Australia, but it still doesn't seem worthwhile at all.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Question Mark on March 02, 2014, 05:26:08 AM
This thread is so riddled with nationalism, IR realism, and fear-mongering (the omnipresent invisible enemy) it's actually difficult to take seriously.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Kyo on March 02, 2014, 06:01:39 AM
This thread is so riddled with nationalism, IR realism, and fear-mongering (the omnipresent invisible enemy) it's actually difficult to take seriously.
Good to know I'm not the only one thinking this.

Even two thousand years ago people were wise enough to say "ubi bene, ibi patria".
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Unimaginative Username on March 02, 2014, 10:52:52 AM
To be honest, most of the reasons given for mandatory military service here don't justify it:
 

* "Commies" may be replaced with a different common enemy relevant to your country if the "Commies" aren't.
** An exception to this would be countries in a situation where war is a real possibility. See below.

The only reason that only really holds up is mandatory military service is useful in case you have to do military service, because in some countries there is a reasonable threat of war and would make the act conscription a bit smoother and easier.


Also the use of this reason to justify anything needs to be banned:
Quote
So yeah by having a compulsory military training you might actually use that training to free yourself and your countrymen from an oppressive regime.



Point One - Common Sense Extended: As a civilian don't walk out in front of snipers, seriously what were you expecting to happen?

Note to reader: You should definitely treat this post as if it has been written with the utmost sincerity and should assume to be responded to in the same totally sincere manner.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Just Lance on March 02, 2014, 02:59:27 PM
Take a look at situation in Ukraine. When it started many civilians were shot at and wounded some even killed.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Unimaginative Username on March 02, 2014, 03:20:01 PM
That was a protest which escalated over the course of a few months and turned violent, it seems like Russia are getting involved too now - though I can speculate why, I don't know the real reason for it. However, I don't see what your point is there.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Just Lance on March 02, 2014, 03:32:55 PM
Well other than it being in "Oh so peaceful" Europe, there were civilian casualties due to fire of lethal ammunition without following a protocol occurred.
The mass panic is a mass panic and I would like to see many people keeping their calm being rational and using common sense when suddenly they pop a couple of rounds into a crowd. That usually escalates into a panic and confusion not to mention a well known factor of "crowd intelligence" when peoples are swayed by the behaviour of the crowd.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Eli on March 02, 2014, 05:11:28 PM
Miss Nile, I guess we have to agree to differ. You see some things as honorable while I don't.
But when it comes to war, I guess we as the people living in such countries can do what we can to prevent a war. And I don't see it as a very distant dream to achieve that, I believe I played my role alongside other people to at least delay a possible war in my country.
And when it comes to sexism, I think religion plays a major role in discrimination against women. Even though it is true that discrimination against women in a certain religion can be rooted to the culture of the people living in the region where that religion originates from.

Just Lance, I don't think you are being fair in your arguments. I never mentioned a "Oh so peaceful" Europe, I said it seems impossible to see "many" european countries which fought during the world wars to start a war with each other again.
I did not say "all" european countries and I did not even say "most" european countries.
While I was writing that, countries like Germany and France came to my mind, not the Ukraine that I was following its news at the moment I was writing my post.
BTW, I'm aware of the Prague Spring in your country and the fact that it ended when Soviet Union and members of the Warsaw Pact invaded your country, then known as Czechoslovak Socialist Republic. I know about the Velvet Revolution and the fact that Czech Republic and Slovak Republic are the results of the country's dissolution a few years after the revolution.
I actually sympathized reading "Audience", "Protest" (Maybe I read all the Vaněk plays written by Havel, I'm not sure) and "Garden Party" scripts.
I'm not claiming that I'm well informed about the region, but I'm not as uninformed as you seem to see me.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Unimaginative Username on March 02, 2014, 06:13:31 PM
Well other than it being in "Oh so peaceful" Europe, there were civilian casualties due to fire of lethal ammunition without following a protocol occurred.
The mass panic is a mass panic and I would like to see many people keeping their calm being rational and using common sense when suddenly they pop a couple of rounds into a crowd. That usually escalates into a panic and confusion not to mention a well known factor of "crowd intelligence" when peoples are swayed by the behaviour of the crowd.

While I understand where you are coming from here I think it's difficult to gauge whether or not the effect of firing live rounds into a crowd would be different if mandatory enlistment existed. A crowd by it's very nature is incohesive and it doesn't take much to cause mass confusion and panic, like you said.
The issue here is that even if someone has gone through basic training they are only going to be a single basically trained individual in a large group of basically trained individuals, as there is no real command structure it would take far more than this to get the crowd to act as one disciplined unit - there were even some defected police and military members in the protest crowds, and whilst they may have outperformed their lesser trained counter-parts when it came to blows, the end result was still the same as the average experience and organisation of the crowd was still far lower than that of the riot police and sharpshooters.

As far as I know it is only in the past few years that mandatory enlistment has been considered for removal from the Ukraine so I expect most of the people in the crowd probably already had some form of basic training. The reason it did not help was because of the lack of organisation due to a lack of chain of command once in a fight - the members of the crowd would require far more experience than standard national service to avoid disorganisation, panic and ultimately a rout.

Crowds like this are a lot like Gauls in a sense that they were organised up until the point of a melee breaking out as they did not have a link between the warlords and the main fighting body. Likewise in protests, they may have protest leaders and seem well ordered but when a riot breaks out it escalates out of control rapidly as no one is there to pass on, or possibly even give, orders - as shown in the Ukraine recently.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Question Mark on March 02, 2014, 09:14:15 PM
Well other than it being in "Oh so peaceful" Europe, there were civilian casualties due to fire of lethal ammunition without following a protocol occurred.
The mass panic is a mass panic and I would like to see many people keeping their calm being rational and using common sense when suddenly they pop a couple of rounds into a crowd. That usually escalates into a panic and confusion not to mention a well known factor of "crowd intelligence" when peoples are swayed by the behaviour of the crowd.

It's peaceful now because Europeans have been killing each other for a very (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years'_War), very (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleonic_Wars) long (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WW1) time (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WW2). When the last two most destructive wars Europe experienced were just two decades from each other and Europe hasn't experienced another one that put it back to the stone age again since 1945, yeah, Europe IS peaceful. It's a historical comparison.

And the military training wouldn't have made a difference due to said crowd intelligence. Now if the protesters were all were armed, uniformed, and had a clear command structure, it would. But that's not a protest, that's a standoff. You don't defuse a tense situation by escalating it.

That was a protest which escalated over the course of a few months and turned violent, it seems like Russia are getting involved too now - though I can speculate why, I don't know the real reason for it. However, I don't see what your point is there.

Non-ethnic Russian Ukrainians want Ukraine to be closer to the EU. Russian Ukrainians and the deposed Russian Ukrainian president want to be closer to Russia. WIP agreement to get closer with EU got scrapped in favor of economic deals with Russia. Things got bad. Russia is there to supposedly "protect the Russian minority", especially those in Crimea. That and the Russian military bases in Crimea, namely the Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: A Fat Kid on March 02, 2014, 11:01:18 PM
Just so you guys know, there isn't a need for anyone in my country to know how to use a firearm.

Because there are no firearms.

Here, the possession of arms carries a death sentence, and you cannot buy a gun or get a license to own one. The only people who carry arms in public are the police and the military.

The local government likes to repeat that mandatory military service exists due to the small population and hence small professional army. It's basically a manpower boost, to have the civilian population ready to take up arms if anything broke out.

You don't even need all of them to run. Enough of them go, and the entire command structure breaks down. As for order, discipline and respect, there are other places to learn those. Parents, school, uniformed groups. I've yet to gain in any of these areas since I joined.

Frankly, I'd say they're deluded. This country is wealthy, and many families have properties overseas. If a war became imminent, people will be running with their families and deserting their posts. Foot soldiers, officers, everything. Why stay and defend your family from a threat, and possibly fail, when you can all run to safety?
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Thunderbird on March 06, 2014, 04:31:45 PM
This is an interesting topic, because there are wast cultural differences, so in our international Freebirdia we are bound to have a lot of different opinions.

Of course it has to be. At least in my opinion.
I disagree with this.

Quote
Sure, it teaches respect, discipline, order and safety but other than that,
So can a lot of other duties.

Quote
it teaches you the morals of the importance of your country, your home and builds within you a meaning of special love and sacrifice for your people and flag.
This has a really bitter-sweet taste, while it gives the positive effect of solidarity it can also go very wrong. It can make you feel superior to people from other countries. Well, we have some bad memories of that in Germany.

Quote
Consider that the country suddenly goes into war and needs to recruit more men for its forces, at least those who'd been through it before wouldn't be completely clueless about weapons and how things work. In the very least, it would save time and effort in the time of need because you'd have previously-trained soldiers, you wouldn't need to teach them all over again.
People that learned some basics 5 years ago would be merely cannon fodder. At least in more developed countries future wars will not be decided by who has the most basic soldiers.

Quote
I know that it's a hassle for most men to have 1 or 2 years of their life obligatory into the military service, and some, if not at all, would rather do something else more useful to them in that time, but really, one year or two isn't that much if it could save your country one day.

Just my two cents. :3

War isn't the only danger, you know?
Teaching people other stuff for 1-2 years could also save the country.
How about 1 year learning about how to deal with a pandemia?
Or how to grow your own food?
Or how about teaching them basic health care for 1 year?
Also why should only men do this?

I could imagine a lot of stuff that would be more useful for the country than military service.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Merlandese on March 06, 2014, 09:50:37 PM
I sometimes harbor this idea in my head that if the US had mandatory military service, it would mean that every single type of person would be exposed to the innards of the process. Hypothetically (and optimistically), you'd end up with a military service that is more in tune to the thoughts and wants of the entire country, rather than be crafted from this small section of civilians that are the "type" to enjoy armed service.

I think of it because oftentimes I'll meet a person who is surprised I was in the military and said something like, "I could never join because of [insert belief]." And that's cool. But then I wonder what would happen to the military if all of these people who tell me this WERE to join. Would it make the military better?
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Tumbles on March 07, 2014, 07:04:58 AM
But then I wonder what would happen to the military if all of these people who tell me this WERE to join. Would it make the military better?

Hell no! It's not a question of sheer numbers. Usually, when people are forced into something, they're not gonna be too happy about it. And if people are angry at country X, I'm sure they're not gonna do a great job at defending country X.

Let's say if I were playing some COD online. I'd much prefer to be on a team of 3 keen pros, as opposed to a team of 10 newbies who don't really wanna play the game.

Kinda unrelated, but I think any argument based on the military teaching morality is out of the question. If you feel the need to force your own morality on others, you'd better check your morality.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Question Mark on March 07, 2014, 07:31:56 AM
I sometimes harbor this idea in my head that if the US had mandatory military service, it would mean that every single type of person would be exposed to the innards of the process. Hypothetically (and optimistically), you'd end up with a military service that is more in tune to the thoughts and wants of the entire country, rather than be crafted from this small section of civilians that are the "type" to enjoy armed service.
The point of training is to streamline the behavior of recruits. The cultural and behavorial osmosis flows from the command (both military and political) down to the recruits and not the other way around.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Thunderbird on March 07, 2014, 07:41:50 AM
I sometimes harbor this idea in my head that if the US had mandatory military service, it would mean that every single type of person would be exposed to the innards of the process. Hypothetically (and optimistically), you'd end up with a military service that is more in tune to the thoughts and wants of the entire country, rather than be crafted from this small section of civilians that are the "type" to enjoy armed service.
The point of training is to streamline the behavior of recruits. The cultural and behavorial osmosis flows from the command (both military and political) down to the recruits and not the other way around.
this +1, if you want to change the military you have to change the people in command.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: ~ on March 07, 2014, 10:50:39 AM
I sometimes harbor this idea in my head that if the US had mandatory military service, it would mean that every single type of person would be exposed to the innards of the process. Hypothetically (and optimistically), you'd end up with a military service that is more in tune to the thoughts and wants of the entire country, rather than be crafted from this small section of civilians that are the "type" to enjoy armed service.
The point of training is to streamline the behavior of recruits. The cultural and behavorial osmosis flows from the command (both military and political) down to the recruits and not the other way around.

Man, you're forgetting the whole idea of what a democracy is (assuming a democracy in the first place).

The political command is in turn controlled by the people (ideally). Merlandese has suggested that if every single person knows first hand what their military forces are like, then they can put pressure on their government to change perceived flaws.

For example, if short people felt oppressed during their service, once they're out there would be pressure on the government to have the culture and behavior changed. That's just a quick example, Merlandese didn't specify what sorts of people were averted to military service. I mean, we could just smash right into gender/sexual/religious/racial/cultural/other minorities in the military.

Though to answer the original question, I think the military has a strong patriarchal culture rooted in tradition. By having everyone thrown into this culture, there's no doubt in my mind that it'd shake things up. How so and to what extent I suppose depends on the society such a thing would be enacted in. In Australia, I believe they'd readily respond to cultural changes. Australia doesn't have a long history, as a result, it's a very modern military from a cultural perspective. It wasn't long ago that our Chief of Army (a lieutenant general) delivered a scathing denouncement of sexism in the military.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Unimaginative Username on March 07, 2014, 11:42:28 AM
Man, you're forgetting the whole idea of what a democracy is (assuming a democracy in the first place).

The political command is in turn controlled by the people (ideally). Merlandese has suggested that if every single person knows first hand what their military forces are like, then they can put pressure on their government to change perceived flaws.

For example, if short people felt oppressed during their service, once they're out there would be pressure on the government to have the culture and behavior changed. That's just a quick example, Merlandese didn't specify what sorts of people were averted to military service. I mean, we could just smash right into gender/sexual/religious/racial/cultural/other minorities in the military.

Yeah, but then everyone would vote to have less training and more doughnuts - then before you know it your military would be so ill-disciplined it can't even stop the French from invading.

That's a bit of an extreme example, but the point is that over time the military would eventually start getting more and more complaints for things like injuries and verbal abuse leading to more and more court cases, this would lessen the authority of higher ranks as they can't do anything remotely straining to their recruits without the risk of some muppet suing them for neglect/abuse if they end up getting a blister during a training exercise.

It may seem like a ridiculous thought, but if you had the combination of people who are begrudging due to being enlisted against their will and a system where you can complain to the government about things you have issues with in the military, knowing this society it would surprise me if this sort of stuff started happening.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Question Mark on March 07, 2014, 01:46:04 PM
The political command is in turn controlled by the people (ideally). Merlandese has suggested that if every single person knows first hand what their military forces are like, then they can put pressure on their government to change perceived flaws.

For example, if short people felt oppressed during their service, once they're out there would be pressure on the government to have the culture and behavior changed. That's just a quick example, Merlandese didn't specify what sorts of people were averted to military service. I mean, we could just smash right into gender/sexual/religious/racial/cultural/other minorities in the military.
If every person of a country was processed into the military service, we'd end up with two kinds of people: (1)those who have come to accept the norms and practices of the military and (2)those who reject them. At best, it'll be a stalemate. At worst, it's a national conscription.

Besides, only the most outrageous flaws(such as gross human rights violation) will merit not only action from the political side but also pressure into the top brass for changes. Anything less than very controversial will be rebuffed, if not outright ignored. The reason for this is that military are their own societies completely enclosed and subjugated by civilian leadership. To ask the military to give up control over its culture and norms to the civilian leadership as well is akin to demoting their prestige to less than of a police force (who, mind you, despite being the civilian in nature, still retains its own cultural identity). Disgruntle the military enough and you might get a coup attempt, and the if the military succeeds in overthrowing the civilian government, pray that they don't replace it with themselves.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Judedeath on March 07, 2014, 02:29:15 PM
I really think part of this is where you're from/where you are now.

Europe and all the countries in it are just so small that it's feasable that even without a protest there could be some military action between them very easily and with thinks like Ukraine happening it must seem like a situation where Civilians being in the middle of anything would be more likely and thus that reasoning for Mandatory Service would hold up more.

Coming from a Canadian perspective though, the way we're located the two main ways a situation like that would happen would be from either: The United States invading Canada for some reason, A Red Dawn like situation where an other country from the other side of the world invades us. Either way we're going to have way worse problems than some civilians not having training.


Ok, another question a reason for service that has been brought up is to teach gun safety, why do I need to be taught gun safety? I don't go hunting, I have no reason to own a gun, why then should I have to give up 2 years of my life to learn safety for something I'm never going to use, I agree gun safety is important and I think everyone should have to take a gun safety course before owning guns, but the military shouldn't be needed to teach that and why should everyone need to learn about it?
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Merlandese on March 07, 2014, 07:17:36 PM
I sometimes harbor this idea in my head that if the US had mandatory military service, it would mean that every single type of person would be exposed to the innards of the process. Hypothetically (and optimistically), you'd end up with a military service that is more in tune to the thoughts and wants of the entire country, rather than be crafted from this small section of civilians that are the "type" to enjoy armed service.
The point of training is to streamline the behavior of recruits. The cultural and behavorial osmosis flows from the command (both military and political) down to the recruits and not the other way around.
this +1, if you want to change the military you have to change the people in command.

Exactly! So, I was in the military for four years, and the one thing I noticed is that people who were any good for the system (that is, people who could create positive change) always left because the system sucked for them. People who were bad for the military (in this situation meaning people who conformed entirely and promised no chance of changing the system for the better) stayed in because the system let them continue being who they were.

Stay in long enough and you gain rank and position. What that means is that the people who are bad for the system always stayed in and gained command power, then propagated those values.

If you agree that you need to change the command to change the system, the first and most realistic step is to join the system and carry your values with you until you reach a command level.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Thunderbird on March 07, 2014, 07:59:00 PM
If you agree that you need to change the command to change the system, the first and most realistic step is to join the system and carry your values with you until you reach a command level.

Which is kinda masochistic, because you will hate everything there.
When you are in a higher position you will still be a lone voice due to that, but chances are you won't even get there, because your morals conflict with your orders too often and the higher ups are more likely to select someone with their views.

It's very difficult to change such stiff hierarchic structures from within.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Tumbles on March 07, 2014, 08:47:19 PM
If you agree that you need to change the command to change the system, the first and most realistic step is to join the system and carry your values with you until you reach a command level.

Which is kinda masochistic, because you will hate everything there.
When you are in a higher position you will still be a lone voice due to that, but chances are you won't even get there, because your morals conflict with your orders too often and the higher ups are more likely to select someone with their views.

It's very difficult to change such stiff hierarchic structures from within.

I agree with everything you said, but I don't see how it would be any easier from the outside.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Question Mark on March 08, 2014, 12:32:30 AM
Exactly! So, I was in the military for four years, and the one thing I noticed is that people who were any good for the system (that is, people who could create positive change) always left because the system sucked for them. People who were bad for the military (in this situation meaning people who conformed entirely and promised no chance of changing the system for the better) stayed in because the system let them continue being who they were.

Stay in long enough and you gain rank and position. What that means is that the people who are bad for the system always stayed in and gained command power, then propagated those values.

If you agree that you need to change the command to change the system, the first and most realistic step is to join the system and carry your values with you until you reach a command level.
Your proposition rests on the idea that everyone is okay with being in the military except they're holding themselves back due to some aspect that they don't like. That's not true. I, for one, am simply not interested in joining the military and I don't want it chasing me around with some conscription notice
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Merlandese on March 08, 2014, 02:22:02 AM
Exactly! So, I was in the military for four years, and the one thing I noticed is that people who were any good for the system (that is, people who could create positive change) always left because the system sucked for them. People who were bad for the military (in this situation meaning people who conformed entirely and promised no chance of changing the system for the better) stayed in because the system let them continue being who they were.

Stay in long enough and you gain rank and position. What that means is that the people who are bad for the system always stayed in and gained command power, then propagated those values.

If you agree that you need to change the command to change the system, the first and most realistic step is to join the system and carry your values with you until you reach a command level.
Your proposition rests on the idea that everyone is okay with being in the military except they're holding themselves back due to some aspect that they don't like. That's not true. I, for one, am simply not interested in joining the military and I don't want it chasing me around with some conscription notice

No, my proposition rests on the idea that if did join the military, the clashing of beliefs about the military would help to reshape it. An example is that we've recently repealed the Don't Ask, Don't Tell act where you were allowed to be gay in the armed forces so long as nobody knew about it. So many homosexuals and homosexual sympathizers rose to power within the armed forces through the years that keeping that shitty rule for tradition's sake was completely unreasonable.

What that shows is that if the military hates, say, black people, then forcibly recruits black people into its system, it has no choice but to change into a body that loves black people because that is what it is made of. Likewise, (and again, hypothetically), if you and others have Value X and you're placed into a community where you can eventually establish power, it follows that you can make Value X a value of that community.

That said, I hated the military and left, rather than stayed to change shit. XD
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Thunderbird on March 08, 2014, 11:24:06 AM
What that shows is that if the military hates, say, black people, then forcibly recruits black people into its system, it has no choice but to change into a body that loves black people because that is what it is made of. Likewise, (and again, hypothetically), if you and others have Value X and you're placed into a community where you can eventually establish power, it follows that you can make Value X a value of that community.

That said, I hated the military and left, rather than stayed to change shit. XD

You cannot really hide the colour of your skin, those people would just have a very bad time in there and chances of them changing the system within are slim to none (because if all people hate them, they will not give them higher up ranks in there).

Congratulation, you would have created a sort of torture chamber in which you force everyone to go.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Question Mark on March 08, 2014, 01:58:15 PM
No, my proposition rests on the idea that if did join the military, the clashing of beliefs about the military would help to reshape it. An example is that we've recently repealed the Don't Ask, Don't Tell act where you were allowed to be gay in the armed forces so long as nobody knew about it. So many homosexuals and homosexual sympathizers rose to power within the armed forces through the years that keeping that shitty rule for tradition's sake was completely unreasonable.

What that shows is that if the military hates, say, black people, then forcibly recruits black people into its system, it has no choice but to change into a body that loves black people because that is what it is made of. Likewise, (and again, hypothetically), if you and others have Value X and you're placed into a community where you can eventually establish power, it follows that you can make Value X a value of that community.

That said, I hated the military and left, rather than stayed to change shit. XD
The burden should be on those who are wrong, not those are wronged. :-\
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Merlandese on March 08, 2014, 07:09:58 PM
No, my proposition rests on the idea that if did join the military, the clashing of beliefs about the military would help to reshape it. An example is that we've recently repealed the Don't Ask, Don't Tell act where you were allowed to be gay in the armed forces so long as nobody knew about it. So many homosexuals and homosexual sympathizers rose to power within the armed forces through the years that keeping that shitty rule for tradition's sake was completely unreasonable.

What that shows is that if the military hates, say, black people, then forcibly recruits black people into its system, it has no choice but to change into a body that loves black people because that is what it is made of. Likewise, (and again, hypothetically), if you and others have Value X and you're placed into a community where you can eventually establish power, it follows that you can make Value X a value of that community.

That said, I hated the military and left, rather than stayed to change shit. XD
The burden should be on those who are wrong, not those are wronged. :-\

The aggressor makes the rules.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Thunderbird on March 09, 2014, 09:09:53 AM
The aggressor makes the rules.

Luckily this isn't always true or humanity would be in an even worse state than it is now.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Just Lance on March 09, 2014, 10:44:51 AM
Or the Ukraine Crisis would already be over....
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Merlandese on March 09, 2014, 08:19:53 PM
I'm definitely not for mandatory military service for most of the reasons you've all mentioned. But I do think there's the opposite side of the coin in here.

On the Human Freedoms side (the stronger of the sides for me), mandatory military service is harsh and cruel. On the opposite side of that would military/national ethics. I think having everyone join the military would A) serve as valuable military education, which would enlighten the entire nation on what the system is, how it works, and why they need it (or not), and B) place every single type of person into a position in which they could actively express their values on the system (internal activism rather than external).

I think with a gun to my head I'd say "no" to mandatory service every time, but there's definitely potential benefits in allowing such a prominent national system to not be entirely segregated from more than half of the nation.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Question Mark on March 10, 2014, 04:52:24 AM
Or the Ukraine Crisis would already be over....
I would like you to expand on this.

I'm definitely not for mandatory military service for most of the reasons you've all mentioned. But I do think there's the opposite side of the coin in here.

On the Human Freedoms side (the stronger of the sides for me), mandatory military service is harsh and cruel. On the opposite side of that would military/national ethics. I think having everyone join the military would A) serve as valuable military education, which would enlighten the entire nation on what the system is, how it works, and why they need it (or not), and B) place every single type of person into a position in which they could actively express their values on the system (internal activism rather than external).

I think with a gun to my head I'd say "no" to mandatory service every time, but there's definitely potential benefits in allowing such a prominent national system to not be entirely segregated from more than half of the nation.
There is no need to join a system to have the right to effectively scrutinize it. If that was the case, then those who haven't gotten into a government post wouldn't have the right to criticize who they elected. Military education does have its benefits, but that doesn't really justify shoving everyone through it unless the state in question has quite an unfriendly neighbor (as in the case of South Korea and Israel). And it's not really segregation if people are free to join it should they wish.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Just Lance on March 10, 2014, 07:34:32 AM
If the aggressor would really make rules then Ukraine crisis about Crimea would be already over.

So what is this crisis about? Well Russia claims that Crimea itself an autonomous region of Ukraine but still a part of Ukraine is joining Russian federation after ex-president of Ukraine Yanukovych fled to Russia because of demonstrations and public unrest which claimed at least 88 lives. The government then decides to have a new election, but  Yanukovych appear on TV and claims he still is the elected president. So "western world"supports the new Kiev government while Russians support  Yanukovych. Yanukovych also signed an agreement and "invited" Russian forces to Crimea... But from the standpoint of the new Ukraine government that act is illegal.

The problem also is that Russia violates many treaties in this "conflict" including and not limited to:
Geneva conventions Article 47 Mercenaries:
2. A mercenary is any person who:
(f) has not been sent by a State which is not a Party to the conflict on official duty as a member of its armed forces.
Russia still denies they have deployed armed forces in Crimea before certain date but it is not true.

1994 Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances:
According to the memorandum, Russia, the U.S., and the UK confirmed, in recognition of Ukraine becoming party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and in effect abandoning its nuclear arsenal to Russia, that they would:

1) Respect Ukrainian independence and sovereignty within its existing borders. (violated)
2) Refrain from the threat or use of force against Ukraine. (Violated)
3) Refrain from using economic pressure on Ukraine in order to influence its politics. (I am not sure about this one, but might be)
4) Seek United Nations Security Council action if nuclear weapons are used against Ukraine.
5) Refrain from the use of nuclear arms against Ukraine.
6) Consult with one another if questions arise regarding these commitments.

Russians also broke their own constitutions (namely paragraph 102d: The jurisdiction of the Federation Council shall include: d) making decisions on the possibility of the use of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation outside the territory of the Russian Federation.) The use of Russian forces was approved by the council on the 1st of this month. The "Polite people" [read Russian Armed Forces in Crimea without any form of ID patches or other markers than their Russian military gear] started to appear on 25th last month.

The Alma Ata Declaration of December 1991, which consigned the Soviet Union to history,
The 1997 agreement on the stationing of the Black Sea fleet in Crimean ports.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Thunderbird on March 10, 2014, 07:59:02 AM
I'm definitely not for mandatory military service for most of the reasons you've all mentioned. But I do think there's the opposite side of the coin in here.

Nearly everything has an opposite side of the coin.
The important question is: Do those positive things outweight the negative ones?
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Question Mark on March 10, 2014, 08:36:52 AM
snip
Treaty-wise, that's sound but have you seen the elephant in the room?

Spoiler: show
Russia isn't afraid nor that it cares.


Aggressive actions against a clearly defiant someone-you-dont-just-push-around state is the last thing anyone wants to do to resolve the situation. This would end the Crimean crisis, granted, because the name would have to be changed to accommodate whatever larger-scale conflict it would evolve to.

Again:
You don't defuse a tense situation by escalating it.

Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Just Lance on March 10, 2014, 11:33:12 AM
As much as I amuse myself with a thought of Russia crumbling once again it is no laughing matter... Russia may not care now but well see if it will stand this. Today warfare is not decided just by military might but also by economics and Russia doesn't have Warsaw pact countries to order to support it's economy.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Oink on March 11, 2014, 01:55:37 PM
Yo folks! How's things recently.

Oh, so we're talkin' bout whether soldiering is the responsibility of the citizen. Well, answer's obvious: its a necessary evil. Havin' been on a coupa o' tours myself, I dare say there are folks around that can't be reasoned with. There are folks that just don't take no for an answer, and there are some that can only rest when you and your allies are six feet under. Can't say I'm a saint myself, but at least I can sleep easier knowing that those folks won't be stickin' around the neighbourhood with my bros watchin'.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Thunderbird on March 11, 2014, 02:29:07 PM
Oh, so we're talkin' bout whether soldiering is the responsibility of the citizen. Well, answer's obvious: its a necessary evil.

I have to disagree, dear sir Oink. Even if it's required to have some soldiers, the army can be recruited from people that want to do this job. So you probably have a smaller, but more professional army.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: SinnyVic on March 11, 2014, 02:44:10 PM
Oh, so we're talkin' bout whether soldiering is the responsibility of the citizen. Well, answer's obvious: its a necessary evil.

I have to disagree, dear sir Oink. Even if it's required to have some soldiers, the army can be recruited from people that want to do this job. So you probably have a smaller, but more professional army.

I have to disagree, dear sir Oink Thunderbird. Even if it's required to have some soldiers, the army can be recruited from engineers that want to create unmanned vehicles giant mecha warriors. So you probably have a smaller, but more mechanized army.


Edit Note: Woops. Getting lazy with my copy pasta.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Oink on March 11, 2014, 03:27:50 PM
Oh, so we're talkin' bout whether soldiering is the responsibility of the citizen. Well, answer's obvious: its a necessary evil.

I have to disagree, dear sir Oink. Even if it's required to have some soldiers, the army can be recruited from people that want to do this job. So you probably have a smaller, but more professional army.

I have to disagree, dear sir Oink. Even if it's required to have some soldiers, the army can be recruited from engineers that want to create unmanned vehicles giant mecha warriors. So you probably have a smaller, but more mechanized army.

Yo Sinny and Thunder,

lolz. Professional or mechanized army... sigh... I wish that's so too. Problem is that threats to our homes ain't aimed at any civilized goals. Thanks to one full century of overseas intervention, we have accumulated enough enemies who have enough hatred to kill us ten times over ten generations. It's like weeds. Pro-army? They ain't gonna stick around ta deal with our toxic wastes once they've earned enough dough to retire to Hawaii.

I'm not saying pro-army ain't good. I've seen Gurkhas doin' 10km in full gear with M60 and 600 rounds on each arm. I've seen Irish boyz dive in some o' those digouts in Baghdad that my pop said remind him o' Vietcong. Sure, they are good at what they do. But there are hardly enough of them around to handle all the dirty work, and trust me, there's more than enough dung lying aroun'. Mech army, you say? Now that's awesome. Problem is our hardware's being sold through some back alley to the other side too. And China's always happy to discount sale what's not on the shoppin' list. So you see, it all boils back to ourselves fightin' for ourselves.

To conclude, every man should be prepared to defend his castle. Ain't no gettin' away in this cruel world.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Question Mark on March 11, 2014, 09:13:57 PM
To conclude, every man should be prepared to defend his castle. Ain't no gettin' away in this cruel world.
Sure. Just don't force me to defend your castle, or anyone else's but my own for that matter.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Oink on March 12, 2014, 12:49:57 PM
Sure. Just don't force me to defend your castle, or anyone else's but my own for that matter.

Lol, kinda hard unless you're livin' in teepees.

Even if you don't respect the command and think nothing of the duty, show at least a wee bit o' gratitude to our boyz on the line. Like it or not though, there are folks out there stickin' their necks out for you and I even right now. Don't ask me to justify war or occupation; that's never why we served. The moment you're in, you're in for a penny, in for a pound, which means that you equate duty to the flag with duty to your friends and family. This is one screwed-up way of thinkin' but there's no other way of justifying things that are done to you and you are asked to do.

When you've seen how things are on the line, it starts to make sense in some horrible way. I mean, can such folks really exist? I've lost a couple of bros to guys that pretend to surrender, pretend to throw down their arms, just so that they can kill a couple more americans. And the worst part is, in retrospect, they are defending their homes - from us. So why are we out there in the first place? As I said, a hundred years of foreign intervention to defend our overseas interests. In some cases, to ensure that the gas continues to flow, so that the economy does not meltdown, so that you and I can continue to rant on forums such as this - or so we're told when we ask the chaplain. There really isn't much to justify in any case, other than the fact that the world's screwed up.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Question Mark on March 12, 2014, 01:31:41 PM
Don't get me wrong, I'm grateful for what the military does. People there do things with their lives on the line. However, that doesn't really justify dragging people into it when they don't want to. I don't hate the military, I hate conscription.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Oink on March 12, 2014, 04:41:24 PM
Y' know, no one really likes conscription, but the alternatives ain't enough. Take drones for example. Ain't robotic weapons awesome? They won't even know wat hit 'em, literally. But all that accumulated hate... where does it go? it gets directed at the entire nation. And the worse part is, others catch on quick. Where they can compete technologically, they'd copy (China). Where they can't, they mix it up with the civilians to chalk up public support. I for one am thankful we didn't get involved in Libya or Syria. Those guys have learnt enough to know where to hit us where it hurts. Doesn't mean that I'd slink away if I get called up on another tour though. Guess its something of a zen feeling once you accept it.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Ferdk on March 14, 2014, 11:27:15 PM
Like it or not though, there are folks out there stickin' their necks out for you and I even right now.

Oh but are they? It sounds nice in the movies and in speeches, but in reality that's hardly ever true. They might think they're "fighting" for their families (nice logic though, let's fight for families in my piece of land while I destroy families that are in another piece of land) but in reality they're just pawns for the higher ups. It's never about defending anything but the interests of a few. It doesn't even matter if a handful (or a lot) really think they do fight for "the people" (again, the logic in that "people are the ones in my arbitrary piece of land" is astounding), they don't get to decide, and the ones who do get to decide, they don't care about you, or me, or any of their citizen.

War may be inevitable, but at the very least we should call it by its name. There's nothing noble in it. If there's anything that this subject proves me is how effective governments can manipulate its people. It's ingrained in many people from the US that these soldiers are heroes, ever doing good, protecting the weak, that it is honorable dying for a piece of cloth that represents the chunk of dirt your mother decided to gave birth to you in. All concepts that baffle me how anyone with a reasonable mind could accept as valid.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Oink on March 15, 2014, 01:32:57 PM
Oh but are they?

Yes, Ferdk, they are.

War may be inevitable, but at the very least we should call it by its name. There's nothing noble in it. If there's anything that this subject proves me is how effective governments can manipulate its people. It's ingrained in many people from the US that these soldiers are heroes, ever doing good, protecting the weak, that it is honorable dying for a piece of cloth that represents the chunk of dirt your mother decided to gave birth to you in. All concepts that baffle me how anyone with a reasonable mind could accept as valid.

Exactly 10 years ago, I asked my pop how ta get through my first week in Baghdad. We just had a farewell dinner, and the rest o' the family's hanging bout the house. Pop was playin' with my toddler niece Sandy who was just a year old then, and he just held out Sandy to me. "Well, son, when the goin' gits rough, just remember lil' Sandy o' here and think how much better for you ta be there instea' o' your brother." Ouch, that was some tough ol' lovin', but I kinda got what he meant. Me bein' there means that some other dude with a pregnant wife or some widow's kid won't have to be called up. Like it or not, justified or not, some would have to go, and a few would die.

I ask myself often what the mudderfakin' hel we were doin' in Iraq, and I still don't have the answer. Mankind goes to war for the most nonsensical of reasons and it's not my lot to reason why. The harsh reality is that we are protecting our friends and families not just from "evil commies", but from unwise decisions of our elected congress and president.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Ferdk on March 15, 2014, 01:41:05 PM
The harsh reality is that we are protecting our friends and families not just from "evil commies", but from unwise decisions of our elected congress and president.

Well, you're doing it wrong. You're not stopping your higher ups from making bad decisions, you're just "taking the bullet" instead of some other innocent person, but still perpetuating the procedure.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Oink on March 15, 2014, 06:45:04 PM
Well, you're doing it wrong. You're not stopping your higher ups from making bad decisions, you're just "taking the bullet" instead of some other innocent person, but still perpetuating the procedure.

I'm not gonna argue that. It's pointless to blame bad leadership or boast bout heroics because the world's more complex than simply blaming your leaders when bad things happen. As I've said before, there's nothing much to justify. I take up arms to defend my friends and family, be it an armed burglar or a foreign invader. Getting conscripted was part of the training I have to undergo in order to realise this. Getting sent off to a war I don't believe in was an unfortunate consequence of my country being led by leaders for which I have a responsibility in voting/not voting for. Discipline and chain of command demands that I obey even when orders are unsound. There's nothin' heroic bout being soldiers other than the fact that the alternative's to let your family and friends become slaves to foreign powers when they invade... though who's to say that we ain't slaves already to an unfeelin' wasteful political machine o' our own makin' already... Dam, dis subject's gittin' me real down. Let's talk bout food instead.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Merlandese on March 15, 2014, 07:14:30 PM
It's ingrained in many people from the US that these soldiers are heroes, ever doing good, protecting the weak, that it is honorable dying for a piece of cloth that represents the chunk of dirt your mother decided to gave birth to you in.

And as a veteran, I can say that even though people were often legitimately proud of "protecting" the US, the simple fact remains that none of them would be in there if they weren't getting paid to do so. If you tell a soldier that he's working for free, and that he can't support his family, then he's not going to stick around simply to be a hero or protect the US. It might seem noble, but it's mostly another job.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Ferdk on March 15, 2014, 08:49:09 PM
Getting sent off to a war I don't believe in was an unfortunate consequence of my country being led by leaders for which I have a responsibility in voting/not voting for. Discipline and chain of command demands that I obey even when orders are unsound.

Well that's exactly why I'm saying you're not fighting for anyone's families. Clearly you don't make any decisions as for what the military force actually does, then how can you claim "I fight for X reason"? You're not deciding what you fight for. You're offering yourself as a resource for someone else to use as they please.
You may want to convince yourself and others that you're fighting for your family, for your neighbor's family and for everyone in 'murica (clearly the only people worth defending), but in reality you're not really doing that because you can't pick your battles. You're a pawn. A pawn that has no choice. You don't get to defend anyone, you get to do someone else's dirty work and get a paycheck for it. The "protect freedom" speech is just something they brainwash you with so you can accept the job and feel proud about it. Part of that manipulation I talked about earlier.

For the record I have respect for the fearless people who can go outthere and face death, but I think they're doing it for the wrong reasons and glorifying the whole thing just makes it worse. There's nothing noble in dying for your country.

Quote
There's nothin' heroic bout being soldiers other than the fact that the alternative's to let your family and friends become slaves to foreign powers when they invade...

Because clearly every country without this sort of military power are all being invaded right now. Besides there's that thing again when the altruistic fairytale is short-sighted. It's always about "friends and family", it's always "I care about people, as long as they were born close to me because I don't know, that's a good reason to me". That's not really altruistic at all. You don't care about the impact your military has on anyone else's lives, it's the mentality of "everyone should stand up for themselves". Like you're part of this 'Murica team. You're a human, if you care about humanity then don't ruin other people's lives to satisfy your paranoic fantasies of freedom. When was the last time someone invaded your land? Why do you feel it's more noble, humane to defend the white family around the corner instead of not nuking a whole city filled with asian citizens? They're not good enough to deserve compassion? But obviously they're not part of your "team", not your problem, right?

Look, I'm not trying to be a hippie saying we all should love each other and destroy our guns or whatever. I'm just saying let's not call these things honorable, noble, or any other positive adjective because none will fit the bill. This is merely a sometimes unnecessary evil we got to live with. If you want to fight for your country, you're entitled to do whatever you want, I can't stop you. But let's not lie to each other saying you're doing for the good of mankind. You're doing it because you were brainwashed into it and because you give a damn about everyone else but those really close to you.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Thunderbird on March 16, 2014, 08:24:23 AM
But let's not lie to each other saying you're doing for the good of mankind. You're doing it because you were brainwashed into it and because you give a damn about everyone else but those really close to you.

Or because you have no other choice.
And that's actually the topic of this thread, the question of choice.

This also opens up the possibility for you to judge the record of your military: Does it invade other countries recklessly?
Well, let's not join it then. Does it only provide self-defence of the country and is helping taskforce in case of disasters like floods? Hey, that doesn't sound too bad, might wanna join there.
Title: Re: Should the military service be mandatory?
Post by: Oink on March 16, 2014, 02:25:06 PM
Lol. Let's see, where to begin...

You may want to convince yourself and others that you're fighting for your family, for your neighbor's family and for everyone in 'murica (clearly the only people worth defending), but in reality you're not really doing that because you can't pick your battles. You're a pawn. A pawn that has no choice. You don't get to defend anyone, you get to do someone else's dirty work and get a paycheck for it. The "protect freedom" speech is just something they brainwash you with so you can accept the job and feel proud about it. Part of that manipulation I talked about earlier.

Notice that never once have I ever attempted to justify wars. I can tell you that none of my bros ever bought that abstract bull about freedom, dignity and whatnots. No dogma means anything when the first IED detonates 6 feet away. Pride? Money? Ain't meant half a camel's arse when you're in a bodybag. I kinda get wat you meant when you said we ain't defending anyone: its just a struggle to survive the next patrol.

Y'know, the worst o' it was that people back home get sick o' it sooner than we do. Folks more interested in Paris Hilton's lack o' dirty underwear than the so-called 'peace-process' in Iraq. Now, use half your imagination and wonder what would happen if we're the ones being invaded. You seriously believe that our average american youth is ready to handle this kinda situations on our own home-turf? I hope you don't suggest that they shuffle their feet and say somethin' like: "Can't we, like, just get along or somethin'?" Oh, by the way, I tried that on the mauled bloody mess o' a fellow who tried to blow up the women's hospital. Didn't work. Prolly because he's too frothin' in the mouth to curse dam infidel americans. He prolly had a blind widow mum back home too, or 5 malnutritioned daughters, but somehow finds it justified to send the infidel scum american to hell for settin' up an emergency hospital for women. How bout the womenfolk that we shinin' white knights defend so much from their demonic religious zealots? They're so grateful that they'd show as some good ol' yandere love by decapitating us and puttin' our heads on spikes from the marketplace.

Look, I'm not trying to be a hippie saying we all should love each other and destroy our guns or whatever. I'm just saying let's not call these things honorable, noble, or any other positive adjective because none will fit the bill. This is merely a sometimes unnecessary evil we got to live with. If you want to fight for your country, you're entitled to do whatever you want, I can't stop you. But let's not lie to each other saying you're doing for the good of mankind. You're doing it because you were brainwashed into it and because you give a damn about everyone else but those really close to you.

Where did morals come into this? Soldiers do their jobs and die. Honor? Reason? Please. If Darwin's still aroun', I'd have butchslapped his arse for even hintin' that mankind evolved from monkeys. Apes' are so much nicer people. Get this straight: no matter how kind/altruistic, how idealistic/self-sacrificing a portion of the population is, the greater half just see what's in front of them. That's just how the world is. Its juvenile to presume that everyone can get along without preparing for the worst. So soldiering's a necessary evil, because mankind ain't good in the first place.