I'm sorry but invasions are a justifiable reason to impose a draft.
No, you’re wrong. Conscription is always wrong. If fighting is justified you won’t need to do it.
Cool so I can come in to your house and steal all your shit, beat up your children, and shoot your dog, and you aren't allowed to fight back because if it was justified, you wouldn't need to?
EDIT: I seem to have misinterpreted the comment, as you appear to be referring to conscription being unnecessary rather than the fighting. Taking the whole context of the comment supports that, but taking only the context of the final sentence makes it appear that you are saying "if fighting is justified you dont need to fight" rather than "if fighting is justified, conscription is unnecessary"
they mean 'it' as in conscription, thwyre saying if the fight was worth it you wouldnt need to conscript
Hm, I see how their comment can be interpreted that way, and it definitely makes more sense like that. They worded it extremely poorly tho, and thus is left pretty ambiguous. I think it would have been much more clear if they just spelled out "conscription" again instead of resorting to the pronoun.
That said, since I do agree with your interpretation I will edit my comment to reflect that
Correct, thanks. I guess I could’ve phrased it better but it was worth it for that dudes completely unhinged reply.
I'm sorry but invasions are a justifiable reason to impose a draft.
No, you’re wrong. Conscription is always wrong. If fighting is justified you won’t need to do it.
Cool so I can come in to your house and steal all your shit, beat up your children, and shoot your dog, and you aren't allowed to fight back because if it was justified, you wouldn't need to?
EDIT: I seem to have misinterpreted the comment, as you appear to be referring to conscription being unnecessary rather than the fighting. Taking the whole context of the comment supports that, but taking only the context of the final sentence makes it appear that you are saying "if fighting is justified you dont need to fight" rather than "if fighting is justified, conscription is unnecessary"
they mean 'it' as in conscription, thwyre saying if the fight was worth it you wouldnt need to conscript
Hm, I see how their comment can be interpreted that way, and it definitely makes more sense like that. They worded it extremely poorly tho, and thus is left pretty ambiguous. I think it would have been much more clear if they just spelled out "conscription" again instead of resorting to the pronoun.
That said, since I do agree with your interpretation I will edit my comment to reflect that
Correct, thanks. I guess I could’ve phrased it better but it was worth it for that dudes completely unhinged reply.
If only reality worked that way