• sunbeam60@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    I spent 3 years in an army that relied on conscription. I do get it, I think.

    I’m fine with a conscientious objector option; this was an option when I joined up and some took it.

    I think there’s a huge gulf between being “forced” to join the army (navy/airforce) of a democratic state’s which serves a purpose a of defending the country against attacks vs being forced to join a force which attacks another country or people. I didn’t make the distinction clear so I’m glad you’re calling me out on it. For clarity, then: I’m talking about conscription into a territorial defense force, not an expeditionary aggressor force.

    • index@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Russia is defending themself from the nazi, israel is defending themself from hamas, france is talking about sending troops to ukraine to defend europe. It’s always the same story. An actual defense conscription would teach people how to throw boiling oil out of their windows, doesn’t seem like it’s going to happen or the goal.