Germany mulls reintroduction of compulsory military service
dw.com
At the end of October, the Bundeswehr said it counted 181,383 soldiers in its ranks — that's still some distance from the target of 203,000 that the German military hopes to reach by 2025. This has given rise to concern in times of Russia's war against Ukraine, which has once again reminded Germans how quickly conflicts can erupt in Europe.
Since taking office at the beginning of 2023, Defense Minister Boris Pistorius has been thinking about ways to make the Bundeswehr more attractive as a career. He said he has received 65 concrete proposals from his ministry on recruitment and reforming training methods.
You are viewing a single comment
Nah, Germany has had compulsory military service before and this was never a thing here.
Conscription is even worse imo.
Compulsory military service and conscription are the same thing in this context.
I know, and I'm calling it worse than the way the US drives their military numbers.
you know that those people will not get send to the frontlines outside of germany, right? If drafted, conscripts only would be deployed on national territory and only if germany would be under attack.
how is forced conscription better when the conscriptee isn't deployed?
you get basic training for a lot of people in case germany gets attacked and also a lot of them get a deeper insight into the Bundeswehr in that way, maybe find it attractive and decide to stay and become regular soldiers.
You also earn quiet good money for easy work, only the first months in basic training are mentally and physically challenging, the rest is pretty chilled.
I did this in 2007, enjoyed the physical challenge and my job after basic training and extended my time in the Bundeswehr to bridge the gap to University, because they only started in winter there and I would have been without a job for 7 months. So I stayed longer, earned good money, exercised a lot and went pretty wealthy into university. We also did finish all Halo campaigns on legendary...
Why is this a good thing?
Seen a documentation about poland recently. A new development there is that the state is conducting military training for every citizen interested. They showed a young women, a hairdresser in her dayjob, taking part in shooting practice. The acceptance of the program within the society was generally good. I would also take part if we had those here, considering what happened in Ukraine, although I'm a pacifist.
https://www.thefirstnews.com/article/poland-announces-new-military-training-programme-for-civilians-37820
because germany gets basic training to a lot of people that could be helpful if the worst case happens and germany gets attacked on their national territory and also they maybe get people attracted to be a regular soldier, ramping those numbers up, by providing them a deeper insight.
I just wrote this in the comment above, are you deliberately being so slow on the uptake or just trolling?
No. I refuse to accept anything as absolute truth. Sorry if that makes your position difficult to argue, but every aspect requires a legitimate explanation for me to accept it. Who's likely to invade Germany?
fair enough. I just explained the benefits and that it was not as bad as it sounds back in my days. I'm not saying that I personally think we need this again or that it is a particular great idea.
right now? My bet would be on the fucking russians, even if they would have to fight a few other countries and NATO before but at this point something stupid like this wouldn't even surprise me.
Also keep in mind that drafted people could also used to help and support in catastrophic events like flooding.
When rich kids fight next to poor kids you will have politicians think twice before they start a war.
What nonsense justification is this? You think rich kids aren't going to find a way around conscription? Because history shows that they always do.
Conscripted armies have proven time and again that they have terrible morale, even in good times. They're a shit idea that should only be used when the country has no other choice.
"On September 16, 1940, the United States instituted the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940, which required all men between the ages of 21 and 45 to register for the draft."
https://www.thoughtco.com/famous-americans-killed-world-war-ii-105521
compulsory military service isn't a good thing though. That's like saying the romans went to war less because the Praetors were cavalry.
cautionary edit: I'm not going to get into historical debates about Romans. The Praetors were primarily from the Equestrian class, and in the early republic were cavalry because they had the money to maintain war horses.
It's a pretty cost effective alternative to maintaining an excessively large standing force.
If everyone gets 12-18 months of training, it allows the nation the capacity to mobilize quickly "on-demand", instead of that capacity being "always on".
I imagine there are other periphery societal benefits. Having a shared experience, even if it is military service, can be good for cultural unity.
Not saying they should or shouldn't, btw. Just saying it might be more pragmatic than the alternatives.
I have a strong family history of military service, with a verifiable family history going back to the US revolution. I get where the idea comes from. There was a point where I supported compulsory military service too. However, it ultimately serves the capitalist class, who are perfectly content to throw their own children to the war machine to ensure that the next quarter is profitable. Conscription certainly serves the purpose of filling out the ranks, but ultimately it's a reason to kill people for the imperialist purposes of ensuring an unequal standard of living between the imperial core (in this case the EU) and the imperial periphery.
I'd challenge you to consider that your perception may be biased, coming from the context of a country that has been at war for 93% of its existence.
My frame of reference on the subject of compulsory service is Finnish, which I imagine is a better analogue to a potential German experience.
I know that I have a bias tinted by the US war machine. However I'd like you to consider that neo-imperialism is something practiced by most of the imperial core.
Neo-Imerialistic Finland?
I think you really need to step outside of your US-based worldview.
Yes, absolutely, the USA has a massive war machine that has been mainly used as leverage to maintain an imperialistic status quo. You have the luxury of a US citizen of not living under the knife of an existential threat.
That luxury, your privilege, is not shared by counties in eastern Europe. Neo-Imerialistic, what, Lithuania? Estonia? They DO live under a real existential threat.
Your US experience is ENTIRELY valid.
Thinking you can apply that experience broadly is not.
The US experience is exceptional. That, plainly, is the reality of life on Earth.
Are you saying that they don't benefit from neo-imperialism, or that they don't actively participate in it?
If your only tool is a hammer, then of course every problem is going to look like a nail.
I went back and read your edit. A lot of mainland eastern Europe is in the position they're in because of the capitalist exploitation that occurred after the collapse of the USSR and Yugoslavia. They also benefit from NATO's imperialism. Considering that NATO has Finland as a member now, they also contribute to the exploitation of the Global South.
You're right, I can't divorce my stance from my material conditions. But that doesn't mean you should plug your ears because it's uncomfortable to think about. I do my best to stick to the facts, regardless of how uncomfortable it is to myself or others.
I'm not plugging my ears. I'm just ordering the coexistent issues by immediacy and impact.
Finland's compulsory service, in the grand scheme of things, makes no difference to South America.
Finland's compulsory service, in the grand scheme of things, makes a massive and immediate difference to Finland's continued existence bordering a belligerent nation with clear aims to expand its borders.
Like, you need to understand, the US military is designed to do MANY things, across the globe, as an empire would to maintain a status quo.
Finland's military, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania... These militaries exist for EXACTLY one purpose, which is self-preservation against a concrete threat.
Again, I think you're not wrong in your acknowledgement of existent factors. I think you're wrong in your relative understanding of the specific impacts for these countries in particular. Yes: there is human urine in the ocean, but it's not practically valuable to conceptualize a swim in the ocean as a bath in piss.
Every country should do it.
why?
It builds character, strengthens the mind and body, while also strengthening the entire nation against the possibility of future invasion.
I like what I see out of countries like Finland and South Korea and I think this is a big part of what makes that so.