In Northen Europe we have seen enough the last couple of years in Izium, Bucha, Kherson, Mariupol to understand that fighting back is preferable to murder, rape and every war crime in the book.
And we prefer a stable democracy before living as a Muscovite vassal state with ruling based on power corruption and lies.
I don't see the relevance of that war for the scenario.
Also, the concept of "fighting back" is silly. Infighting would be the only fighting. There would be no military manouvers and glorious tank battles and nice HD videos of cool ambushes.
Can you elaborate, I did not understand anything about what you are referring to in your comment.
Isn't fighting back what is happening now in Ukraine? Is that silly you mean?
And yeah the military manouevers I guess are a bit different than the text book, particularly with the wide use of drones. But they do need people (including conscripts) to fight back.
Barely. And the country is absolutely drowning in rampant corruption at levels never seen before even in dark ages after the collapse of the USSR. I don't think Ukrainian state will emerge from this war unchanged and unchallenged.
In people's mind. It is just talk of war. People are talked into it. And again i hear this heroic rhetoric about defending one's country. It is pure propaganda. And to defend what exactly?
Military, a year of conscription life wasted to make you a potential tool of someone's politics. Forcing civilians with weapons to your will, while looting and raping.
I'll take the domestic corrupt bureaucrats over Russian installed puppets, because they'll do whatever the US Embassy tells them to.
The Soviets applied the well known Crimea scenario and won past 1945 without firing a single bullet. Eastern Europe was transformed into into buffer states. This time maybe our countries might not fall under the Russian sphere of influence if we shoot'em dead like the Finns did during the Winter War.
I will also gladly vote yes to have US nukes pitched against Russia on my country's soil if I am ever asked to do so. I do hope our politicians will decide to have them anyway as part of being a NATO member and as deterrence all while classifying it, to neuter Russian propaganda.
They won't dare to attack if we're armed to the teeth and have nukes pointed against them, even if they're operated by the US. The Kremlin scare talk of "legitimate targets" is just BS to discourage us from doing so. Real deterrence is done with weapons, not talk.
Talking about conscription before building capacity for providing training to even just volunteers that want to be prepared to defend their country is basically scaring ton of economically valuable people into leaving their country.
A land war in Europe is not viable by conventional means anyway. We're not going to fight door to door. Not that again.
It's good for the border countries to have a deterrent and we in Western Europe should support them on this. But the nuclear umbrella should be the main deterrent.
Yeah I meant EU/NATO Europe of course. Once Russia gets into the EU or NATO bloc it gets huge obviously. Because of article 5.
As for Ukraine I didn't forget Ukraine was still very much aligned with Russia in the early 2000s (and an oligarchy like Russia that attacked the EU with similar tactics like ransomware). They only started repenting in the 2010s.
I feel like this is a more complicated issue because of that. They could have joined when the Baltics did but they didn't want to, they were very firmly in the Pro Russia camp. Then they could have had a lot more protection.
I don't get it how conscription is going to be compatible with all the values that EU/the West has been grown to respect and spread across the world: individual freedom, freedom of cooperation, human rights and so on. Conscription goes against every one of them.
I can see the problem, it's clearly there and maybe, yes, maybe conscription is the answer. My question still stands: how can a western society be healthy and prosperous with a mandatory service enforced on the population.
I live in Scandinavia. I never saw a conflict with those values. On the contrary, human rights is one of the values we have to defend.
There is also a big chunk of collectivism here. You don't only have rights, you have responsibilities too. Paying tax is one of them, and defending your country is one.
But my country had conscription up until 10-20 years ago so it is still in our DNA i guess. I myself did 15 months of (conscripted) military service. Long ago.
A country is a service organization that is collecting my taxes and spending that money to build roads.
If my service organization does a poor job of building roads I can choose to pay taxes to a different organization on a different territory.
Now this service org also wants to take a year of my life in my prime years. And it seems I cannot choose to not participate. I'm not sure how that is compatible with freedom.
The paradox being that freedom needs defending and only totalitarian russia can afford to purchase soldiers, while free countries are now back of forcing its people to participate in the war mandatory.
Yeah, i understand Ukraine has much stricter rules. Of course out of necessity, and things could change also here in case of such an emergency.
But after all, the main point of a conscriptions (or any military) is not to kill Russians. It is to make sure they don't get the idea to come here in the first place.
It's ilegal to emigrate to avoid the draft. They will probably not make a Red Notice in Interpol, but if you ever want to return to meet your family you may get a fine or arrested and send to conscription. (Sometimes there are mass pardons after a few years, but it depends on the country.)
I don't know if they kept the conscription all along though unlike Sweden.
There are many things to say with the Swedish restart. I would expect som improvements compared to last time.
1. Better salary.
2. Both men and women are expected to join.
3. There is a broader view of what conscription means. Defence is not only about military. It could be firefighting or nursing or taking care of elderly.
You have to understand that there is no huge outcry in Sweden about this, but rather a reasonable concensus.
Maybe if the war was on us or on our doorstep it would have been different.
1. We have had conscription for most of the 1900s, it is only the last 10 years that was an anomaly. Your father (me) will probably be able to tell stories about it.
2. With the scale proposed and with both men and women eligble, it means that it is effectively voluntary.
3. There are enough young people around 20 that would not know exactly what to do anyway, so this can be seen as a good option to get some experience.
4. 1-3 needs to happen anyway to get political acceptance for this.
We had conscription until ~1990, when one of the conscripts was killed by their teammates and lieutenant, and the body hidden so he was declared a desertor for a few weeks [1].
Old anecdotes are like: "John broke a glass and all of us were forced to stay in the regiment during the weekend sleeping outdoor." In any works it's clearly abuse, but it's a fun story in conscription.
My father was a conscript during the "Blue and Red" revolt ("Azules y Colorados") [2]. I don't remember the details, but the Military Junta split and it was so difficult to understand which was the rebel side and the loyal side, that the sides were named just "Blue" and "Red". My father used to say he was in the "Green" side because both "Blue" and "Red" fired at him.
Anyway, not having a nearby nuclear power with our name in their to-invade list makes things easier.
One thing that seems very hard to understand in other countries is the general trust of the government in Sweden. Over and over again during the pandemic, we had to explain that we don't lock people up, they will listen to the recommendations.
And it is probably the same thing here.
I am hoping (since my general intention is to be optimistically-naive) is that the reboot will get rid of a lot of the abuse. There sure was a heap of that in the 90s. Particularly for the odd women that choose to serve. Nothing tangible that i know of, but just the regular "locker room talk" as a self-proclaimed land-father-figure would call it.
It probably also helps that we have not been at war for 200 years. And for our neighbors Norway and in particular, they fought a purely defensive war for survival during WWII, so their motivation is probably even higher.
43 comments
[ 2.4 ms ] story [ 104 ms ] threadWhere are you from? And who are you precisely?
The elite need a professional army that protects them and force the population to starve to death.
Conscripts are a liability. You need the type of person that like violence and self selects for it.
This pretending there would be some nice and coozy gentleman's war is lunacy.
In Northen Europe we have seen enough the last couple of years in Izium, Bucha, Kherson, Mariupol to understand that fighting back is preferable to murder, rape and every war crime in the book.
And we prefer a stable democracy before living as a Muscovite vassal state with ruling based on power corruption and lies.
Also, the concept of "fighting back" is silly. Infighting would be the only fighting. There would be no military manouvers and glorious tank battles and nice HD videos of cool ambushes.
Isn't fighting back what is happening now in Ukraine? Is that silly you mean?
And yeah the military manouevers I guess are a bit different than the text book, particularly with the wide use of drones. But they do need people (including conscripts) to fight back.
Barely. And the country is absolutely drowning in rampant corruption at levels never seen before even in dark ages after the collapse of the USSR. I don't think Ukrainian state will emerge from this war unchanged and unchallenged.
Source: am Ukrainian.
Military, a year of conscription life wasted to make you a potential tool of someone's politics. Forcing civilians with weapons to your will, while looting and raping.
The Soviets applied the well known Crimea scenario and won past 1945 without firing a single bullet. Eastern Europe was transformed into into buffer states. This time maybe our countries might not fall under the Russian sphere of influence if we shoot'em dead like the Finns did during the Winter War.
I will also gladly vote yes to have US nukes pitched against Russia on my country's soil if I am ever asked to do so. I do hope our politicians will decide to have them anyway as part of being a NATO member and as deterrence all while classifying it, to neuter Russian propaganda.
They won't dare to attack if we're armed to the teeth and have nukes pointed against them, even if they're operated by the US. The Kremlin scare talk of "legitimate targets" is just BS to discourage us from doing so. Real deterrence is done with weapons, not talk.
Here in Scandinavia the true enemy has unveiled itself in the last couple of years.
And don't try to fool me to think that living under Russian oppression is better than "liberal democracy" or what you would call it.
Russia may have gained some ground in Ukraine, but it has lost all confidence from all its neighbors for generations to come.
It's good for the border countries to have a deterrent and we in Western Europe should support them on this. But the nuclear umbrella should be the main deterrent.
The method is small doses of escalation. Which means that it is never the time to press the button.
We have lots of conflicts involving nuclear states (USA, India, Pakistan, China, Russia, Israel Great Britain) but never since 1945 has it been used.
As for Ukraine I didn't forget Ukraine was still very much aligned with Russia in the early 2000s (and an oligarchy like Russia that attacked the EU with similar tactics like ransomware). They only started repenting in the 2010s.
I feel like this is a more complicated issue because of that. They could have joined when the Baltics did but they didn't want to, they were very firmly in the Pro Russia camp. Then they could have had a lot more protection.
I can see the problem, it's clearly there and maybe, yes, maybe conscription is the answer. My question still stands: how can a western society be healthy and prosperous with a mandatory service enforced on the population.
There is also a big chunk of collectivism here. You don't only have rights, you have responsibilities too. Paying tax is one of them, and defending your country is one.
But my country had conscription up until 10-20 years ago so it is still in our DNA i guess. I myself did 15 months of (conscripted) military service. Long ago.
If my service organization does a poor job of building roads I can choose to pay taxes to a different organization on a different territory.
Now this service org also wants to take a year of my life in my prime years. And it seems I cannot choose to not participate. I'm not sure how that is compatible with freedom.
The paradox being that freedom needs defending and only totalitarian russia can afford to purchase soldiers, while free countries are now back of forcing its people to participate in the war mandatory.
The irony.
I can't choose to pay taxes in another country without emigrating. What are you trying to say?
Also, with the scale proposed in these countries it is in practice not really mandatory. If you don't want to you can say no.
And certainly it is only a whole year if you are willing to serve that long.
This is something that I did not realize. If that works - perfect.
> it is in practice not really mandatory
This is what I was hoping for.
But after all, the main point of a conscriptions (or any military) is not to kill Russians. It is to make sure they don't get the idea to come here in the first place.
I am sorry this did not help Ukraine.
https://www.pliktverket.se/monstring-och-varnplikt/monstring...
https://finlandabroad.fi/web/usa/varnplikt
I don't know if they kept the conscription all along though unlike Sweden.
There are many things to say with the Swedish restart. I would expect som improvements compared to last time.
1. Better salary.
2. Both men and women are expected to join.
3. There is a broader view of what conscription means. Defence is not only about military. It could be firefighting or nursing or taking care of elderly.
How much time after 18 you must wait to return?
I guess 1 day before ypur bithday and 1 day after is not enought.
What you need to do is to change your adress to some place abroad, which you can do online here:
https://www.skatteverket.se/privat/folkbokforing/flyttanmala...
You have to understand that there is no huge outcry in Sweden about this, but rather a reasonable concensus.
Maybe if the war was on us or on our doorstep it would have been different.
1. We have had conscription for most of the 1900s, it is only the last 10 years that was an anomaly. Your father (me) will probably be able to tell stories about it.
2. With the scale proposed and with both men and women eligble, it means that it is effectively voluntary.
3. There are enough young people around 20 that would not know exactly what to do anyway, so this can be seen as a good option to get some experience.
4. 1-3 needs to happen anyway to get political acceptance for this.
We had conscription until ~1990, when one of the conscripts was killed by their teammates and lieutenant, and the body hidden so he was declared a desertor for a few weeks [1].
Old anecdotes are like: "John broke a glass and all of us were forced to stay in the regiment during the weekend sleeping outdoor." In any works it's clearly abuse, but it's a fun story in conscription.
My father was a conscript during the "Blue and Red" revolt ("Azules y Colorados") [2]. I don't remember the details, but the Military Junta split and it was so difficult to understand which was the rebel side and the loyal side, that the sides were named just "Blue" and "Red". My father used to say he was in the "Green" side because both "Blue" and "Red" fired at him.
Anyway, not having a nearby nuclear power with our name in their to-invade list makes things easier.
[1] Autotranslation: https://es-m-wikipedia-org.translate.goog/wiki/Caso_Carrasco... Original: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caso_Carrasco
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1963_Argentine_Navy_revolt The article calls one side "Colored", but "Red" is a better translation.
One thing that seems very hard to understand in other countries is the general trust of the government in Sweden. Over and over again during the pandemic, we had to explain that we don't lock people up, they will listen to the recommendations.
And it is probably the same thing here.
I am hoping (since my general intention is to be optimistically-naive) is that the reboot will get rid of a lot of the abuse. There sure was a heap of that in the 90s. Particularly for the odd women that choose to serve. Nothing tangible that i know of, but just the regular "locker room talk" as a self-proclaimed land-father-figure would call it.
It probably also helps that we have not been at war for 200 years. And for our neighbors Norway and in particular, they fought a purely defensive war for survival during WWII, so their motivation is probably even higher.
And still more death per million than Sweden (2.9K vs 2.6K). https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/total-covid-cases-deaths-...