EPTWere I given a choice, obviously I wouldn't gone to the army, but it was a interesting experience nonetheless.
Is Mandatory Military Enlistment still needed? - Page 5
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
DERPDERP
Kyrgyzstan189 Posts
Were I given a choice, obviously I wouldn't gone to the army, but it was a interesting experience nonetheless. | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8641 Posts
| ||
|
japro
172 Posts
In the end all i got out of those 330 days so far was like two funny stories to tell, a lot of lost time, repetition courses massively interfering with my studies and a constant feeling of "man what could i have done with all that time that I spent wasting tax money for nothing". | ||
|
Jarree
Finland1004 Posts
For example I... Spent a year in mandatory service, therefore missed a whole year of university studies. Was selected to a be trained as a reserve officer. Sometimes it was fun, sometimes really shit. Made it to television (lol). Learned to lead large masses of people, organize things, make quick decisions under pressure. Got paid like ~100-300€/month. Met a lot of different kind of people (even a future miss finland finalist serving with me). Am still good friends with a few fellow officers. Not that horrible. | ||
|
FrozenSolid
Finland134 Posts
On April 02 2013 17:32 Maenander wrote: Exactly my thoughts, the military needs more horses, they can carry so much more artillery ammunition and have the stamina to hoof around with 200 kilos of equipment. Admittedly, I don't understand much about the requirements of the "modern" military, but why should everyone have to fulfill the same tasks in a unit? Why shouldn't there be specialists that have different abilities than the normal grunt? It's not like a country like Norway beats the enemy with sheer numbers! This is simply being ignorant. I did MMS in a supporting branch of the army (air-defense) where physical requirements that conscripts must attain are far below what is expected of infantry, which means the biological differences between men and women in strength and stamina matter far less during excercises and drills than it would in a front-line unit. My Battery had around 10% female voluntary conscripts, and as a rule the squads and sections they were assigned to had to pick up their slack during every major excercise and drill. These aren't just any unmotivated chicks out looking to get laid or express their endowment to feminist ideals by joining the military, but people who genuinely wanted to serve their country, learn what it means to be a soldier (as much as anyone can without seeing actual combat) and who tried their best in all situations. Frankly these women had more balls than half their sections combined, yet the morale among the squads they were assigned to was lower than all-male squads, and they generally took longer to establish and fortify new positions and be ready to fire / support the firing teams. In case their activities were hampered by enemy attacks, their sustained "casualities" (in training excercises) were higher than in all-male squads. The women were actually excellent specialists (signals operators, weapon system commanders, etc) in their respective fields, but they were much worse all-arounders. That meant that when everything went smoothly and there was no interference they did produce good results, often better than the all-male squads. The thing is, there will never be a combat situation that resembles peacetime "ideal" training conditions. There will be casualities, interference, defection, low morale and other issues that heavily influence the capabilities of the squad. You will be undermanned and outgunned, and that is the situation you want your military to be prepared for. What matters is that the squad can perform what is expected of it, not that it can exceed that expectation in ideal conditions and fail it in worse conditions. If the women had only had to fulfill a very narrow niche in their units, this wouldn't be an issue. However, this means that the unit has to have an additional member who can perform the tasks that aren't getting done since the specialist is not able to do it. That's another person you have to feed, house and train. Military units in small countries are already stripped down to minimal numbers to keep costs down. You can't really have extra "ablative" soldiers goofing around for when things get sour. No army has an unending supply of grunts to magically appear out of the woods and perform every menial task you need done without any requirements for upkeep. You have to earn your weight in the military, and you have to be responsible for both yourself and your unit. That specialist who only does one task is essentially a "damsel in distress" regardless of actual gender who requires protection and has suddenly turned into a huge liability. When it all comes down to it, gender is a complete non-issue. What matters is if you can do something or if if you can't. I met some female officers during my MMS who could've kicked my ass both literally and figuratively in anything regarding my assigned tasks, and those officers were well respected amongst the conscripts. The thing is, not all women are like that and neither are all men. Those women excelled because they had the physical ability to do so, not because they were women. I think that the military should be more selective with male conscripts because it really serves no purpose to train completely unmotivated people and if you exclude women from conscription on the grounds of physique then you should also exclude obese and sickly underweight men as well. Then again, I'm a dirty conscript so what the hell do I know? | ||
|
Iyerbeth
England2410 Posts
I'm finding that many of the points I want to make could fairly be considered as nation bashing (though that's not my intent) so I'm just going to stop. I'll just conclude by saying, I strongly consider it should be a war crime to force people in to a miiltary organisation. | ||
|
sc2superfan101
3583 Posts
off topic: + Show Spoiler + Just as allowing women to serve in the military ignores the realities of warfare in general, and of gender roles in general. So even if conscription is your thing, best to keep it exclusively male. | ||
|
DERPDERP
Kyrgyzstan189 Posts
On April 02 2013 19:33 Iyerbeth wrote: I really don't think there's a single good reason to force people in to the military. I'm fortunate in that it was never an issue for me, but I would rather go to prison than the army in any country. If a country is legitimately in danger and the current state of affairs is worth fighting with, then those so inclined will join up. I'm finding that many of the points I want to make could fairly be considered as nation bashing (though that's not my intent) so I'm just going to stop. I'll just conclude by saying, I strongly consider it should be a war crime to force people in to a miiltary organisation. Too bad the time you'd have to spend in the army is much shorter than the time in jail. There are not many people who have the conviction to spend a year in jail rather than 6 months in army cause of their beliefs. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25107 Posts
On April 02 2013 20:08 DERPDERP wrote: Too bad the time you'd have to spend in the army is much shorter than the time in jail. There are not many people who have the conviction to spend a year in jail rather than 6 months in army cause of their beliefs. Some people do have principles though  Incidentally, how many countries let you avoid the draft for moral (non-religious) reasons? I probably feel more anti-war, anti-nationalist than a hell of a lot of religious groups that get such opt outs from what I am reading? I'm surprised tbh, TL seems very cosmopolitan and non-nationalistic at times, but in this thread the consensus seems to be that this is a good/necessary things. Also, for those saying that their service was beneficial/'taught discipline' etc, I don't disagree but can some of you expand on what you mean? There's an interesting discussion to be had, I for one don't think that accepting orders and working hard are necessarily inherently good things. | ||
|
Telcontar
United Kingdom16710 Posts
Sometimes, the freedom and rights of the individual has to be sacrificed for the greater good. | ||
|
DERPDERP
Kyrgyzstan189 Posts
On April 02 2013 20:19 Wombat_NI wrote: Some people do have principles though Incidentally, how many countries let you avoid the draft for moral (non-religious) reasons? I probably feel more anti-war, anti-nationalist than a hell of a lot of religious groups that get such opt outs from what I am reading? I'm surprised tbh, TL seems very cosmopolitan and non-nationalistic at times, but in this thread the consensus seems to be that this is a good/necessary things. Also, for those saying that their service was beneficial/'taught discipline' etc, I don't disagree but can some of you expand on what you mean? There's an interesting discussion to be had, I for one don't think that accepting orders and working hard are necessarily inherently good things. Doubt any country lets you avoid draft for any other than medical or religious reasons. What comes to discipline, I don't feel I was taught discipline, quite the opposite, I became more regardless of authorities and learned how to avoid working hard :D | ||
|
Arcadia92
135 Posts
On April 02 2013 05:32 xwoGworwaTsx wrote: In China, due to its highly political and military history in the formation of its country through different warring states, conscription continues today starting from circa 220 BC. Your OP is pretty uninformative in general but I seriously question this particular line. Conscription existed way before 220 BC in China, and I'm pretty sure its non-existent now. Conscription is undeniably necessary for certain countries, but its important to correctly determine the duration and extent of training that a conscript receives. If the duration is too long, then it leads to inefficiency and the unnecessary sacrifice of individual freedom. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25107 Posts
Are you actually from Kyrgyztan incidentally? | ||
|
ApocAlypsE007
Israel1007 Posts
You will be pressed hard to find a job if you didn't do the military service, and those who served in fightning units (especially officers) have certain benefits. The people who don't do the service are hated here and considered leeches (the Ortodox religious are a prime example). I served 3 years in the army as an aircraft technitian, and I did learn about the value of team work, theory vs practice, being more independent person. Generally people in Israel in their early 20s after army are more mature relative to same age range on countries which doesn't have mandatory military service. That being said, I don't see the point in holding a mandatory service in places like Scandinavian countries and Switzeland (lol wtf) as there isn't a constant threat to those countries, and it seems that troop morale is low because there is no point in holding them there. | ||
|
DERPDERP
Kyrgyzstan189 Posts
On April 02 2013 20:50 Wombat_NI wrote: Well discipline isn't adherence to authority anyway, for me it's a matter of self-motivation and if you have to be co-opted into displaying it, that isn't discipline. Are you actually from Kyrgyztan incidentally? No, I'm just protecting my anonymity in da internets :3 The only kind of discipline you might learn is that you gain absurd tolerance for stupidity, there are people so stupid it makes you wonder why are they not diagnosed with autism. I do have a theory tho, they're not actual people, they're like unicorns, they only exist in army barracks. After your service, you'll never see them in the wild. E: practically what the man under me said in internet speak. | ||
|
FrozenSolid
Finland134 Posts
On April 02 2013 20:19 Wombat_NI wrote: I'm surprised tbh, TL seems very cosmopolitan and non-nationalistic at times, but in this thread the consensus seems to be that this is a good/necessary things. Also, for those saying that their service was beneficial/'taught discipline' etc, I don't disagree but can some of you expand on what you mean? There's an interesting discussion to be had, I for one don't think that accepting orders and working hard are necessarily inherently good things. So far the majority of posts are from countries that employ or have employed conscription in the near past. The topic also would attract people who actually have been conscripted, so you are going to get a lot of weighted opinions. It's also been daytime in europe, which further drives the concensus towards one way of the spectrum. That being said, I was under the impression that the current consensus is that conscription is ok in areas that have a potential geopolitical foreign threat, but elsewhere there's no reason for it. The discipline you learn in the army has less to do with blindly following orders (though there's plenty of that too) and more with dealing with people. When you throw a bunch of young guys into the same barracks, there's going to be some kind of conflict there. Discipline is a way to deal with that. If you have a problem with someone, you can't just tell him to fuck off and carry on with your life - you're going to have to work and possibly even sleep in the same room with him for a lengthy period of time. You might have to follow his orders and do what he says, no matter how menial it may seem. You can't go for the same old shit you did at school by shunning/avoiding that guy because the military institution forces you to work with him. Even if there's no innate conflict, the army will present you with plenty of situations where there will be an artificial one (Once you haven't slept at all in a couple of days, you're wet and cold and tired and someone busted up your only tent so your options are to sleep outside in -20C, or carry on without sleep, you tend to get pretty angry pretty quickly). If you haven't already, you learn to deal with people you'd rather not deal with to achieve a common goal, and that's a pretty good skill to have. You're going to also have situations where other people in your unit haven't done what they're supposed to, and you have to do both your work and theirs. It teaches you the value of having people to rely on and may dispel some disillusions you have about what you aren't able to do by yourself. Lots of people wouldn't think they could hike 50 miles carrying around 80-100lb of equipment in a day, but it's actually pretty easy. I wasn't in good shape going in to the army and I could manage it just fine. Working hard is something I feel is generally accepted as an inherent good thing, so I don't really know what you mean by it not being one. Work hard play hard seems to be something that's pretty universal | ||
|
SheepleArePeopleToo
Sweden73 Posts
| ||
|
OneRedBeard
Germany313 Posts
The main argument for mandatory military service was never to bolster the strength of our armed forces, even though that was an important side-effect during high-tide cold war. The important thing was that we did not want our military to ever become closed off from the public again, a state of its own inside the nation. With new recruits from all fields of life came new ideas and new views into the force, forcing it to adapt to new times and new social backgrounds. After all, one thing that made the first half of the twentieth century what it was in my country was the unbreakable faith of the military, driven by misunderstood ideals of honor and loyalty, held high by a command corps of tightly-knit prussian noble families that cultivated the same ideas and ideals for generations. Without this state of mind inside the troops, neither the seminal catastrophe of World War 1 nor the dehumanization of an entire people in World War 2 would have been possible. That is why we needed - and, in my humble opinion still need - mandatory military service in Germany. Not for our military to save us from the Russians, but for our people to save our military from itself. After all, we know what it can become if it is left to itself for too long. Oh, and public service for Kriegsdienstverweigerer like me was a great experience of blissfully little responsibility before having to start into the dullness of actual adulthood! :-) | ||
|
Resilient
United Kingdom1431 Posts
Mandatory enlistment wouldn't solve the issues at hand with this horrible country, but I'm pretty sure it might teach a few chavs the value of respect. | ||
|
Shortizz
Singapore129 Posts
Many people here seems to have an idea of MMS being just weapons training and doing Sentry duties/ nothing /waiting for something to happen but you are horribly mistaken. U choose ur own path over here in the MMS just like u do in life. U can learn to lead(trust me, motivating ppl who dont want to be there is incredibly hard), excel at a particular skil which u can apply in the society in future or you can be one of those who waste 2 years mopping floors cos all u ever think of is to get out of it/slack/mylifeissad. Some of the bonds that u forge whilst serving cannot be replicated in any community and it is during MMS that you see ppl from all walks of life/race/religion. The Muslims didn't drink water during Ramadan despite us training under a hot sun, so out of respect and camadarie, none of us drank too. Also, MMS gives u the first hand look of who are gonna succeed in life and whose gonna be wasting away their life. Those who excelled during MMS are often the ones who excel in society too. Those who are lazy/stupid/icanbebothered ended up in the lower echelons of the society. So yeah, I had fun. I learn alot of things ranging from operating office machines to communication skills/motivating. And although I bitch about it as much as the next guy, I would gladly do it again. In fact, I always have a pretty good time during reservice, getting away from work stress and meeting old friends Doing stupid shit is pretty fun. My dad did it, I did it and I would want my son to do it too. | ||
| ||
