Some days I love the idea of mandatory service for able, sane citizens.
Most days, I'm thankful to be surrounded by volunteers who believe in their oaths.
Look up righteous armies in Korea you’ll see what compulsory military service can do for your country. [Not that I believe in it I just like being a contrarian]
Conscription and mandatory service are different aren’t they? Mandatory service is like everyone joins the service for like 2 years or whatever during war or peace time. While conscription is when you are put into the military while there’s a conflict and a surplus of human power is required.
irregulars generally spring up in places like this because of the fact that everyone already has military training they just aren’t in the service anymore.
I don’t know the particulars to be honest but I think it just has a lot to do with the chaos of war and what not. As these were scenarios when they were under a ground invasion either from the Japanese or during the Korean War so it wasn’t easy to reach everyone all at once i’m sure a large portion of troops were reactivated but the ones that weren’t Still organized themselves
Just a small correction. The Swedish military was downsized so much from 1991-2016, that we would wryly joke that if the Russians attack, Sweden could mobilize faster than anyone - as it would only take 2 phone calls to reach the 2 remaining officers. The country has finally woken up and started to remilitarize. Sweden reintroduced semi-compulsory military service in 2018. We don't yet have the infrastructure to implement full compulsory military service, but are ramping up. There will be quite a few years yet when we have to turn away eager enlistees. Of course service is available to both sexes, and I am not aware of the criteria by which applicants are approved or turned away. Being Sweden, I expect it to primarily be related to physical fitness, grades and special skills.
To anyone serving in the Swedish military - thank you so much for your service!
Ok... but several European nations conscript the transgender and several do not. Many armed forces do not even allow the transgender to serve. If we are taking a position of universal equality or no equality- it would seem that focusing on the conscription of women is a narrow focus no? More likely that regardless of gender that any able person within a given age range would be called upon to serve? There’s no reason to create divisions where none need exist- and framing this as an issue of “male” vs “female” equality is going just that when we consider those otherwise able individuals who cannot even volunteer due to their sexuality or self identity.
If things ever get bad enough to reinstate the draft, we do not need to complicate logistics for people who won't be combat effective anyways, so only pre-ops could be taken. The rest would be best relegated to factories, farming, or something similar.
I’m not arguing that isn’t the case or that it is. From a practical and tactical standpoint yeah- Militaries tend to work best off standardization and as part of their nature. Complications are just that- distractions from using all your resources and focus towards a goal. My point wasn’t that we should or shouldn’t draft Transgender folks. It’s that if one wants to argue a male oriented draft is discriminatory- then one has to include transgenders. Because women complicate the military. Again- I’m not saying thats a reason not to allow women to serve- I’m saying that women tend not to fit in the standard template of sizes and shapes the military tries for. Female body armor and the like is different than male body armor- there are other differences and concerns that complicate logics, supply chain, administration, etc.
So what I was saying is that it is not “man argument of equality but petulance and sarcasm that underpins the posters logic. It isn’t motivated by a true desire for “fairness” but by a desire to “punish” or “troll” women using equality as a tool to place a burden on them they do not currently carry but men do. Because of it was a genuine issue motivated only by equality we would have to include trans people. It’s a simple fact that even coped militaries face logistical and administrative challenges dealing with women and the fact women have considerations men do not. Much like women’s prisons where women do not commonly have access to simple things like hygiene products or proper care- and those facilities aren’t cooed or combat oriented.
So if we follow the logic that we need to make the draft all inclusive in order to avoid inequity, and we say that we seek that equality over practicality, and as a practical matter there is essentially no effective military on earth which has anywhere near a 50/50 mix of men and women serving similar roles, then it follows it isn’t actually equality unless we include transgender people. Because wether you believe trans is its own gender or there are 5000000 genders or just 2- that either means trans gender is a gender that should be required to serve if the other genders are- or it means that there are only men and women and trans people would be one or the other and men and women are required to serve so they are too.
Transgender is not a diagnostic disease of mind or body, it is not classified as a disability or medical condition, so there isn’t a criteria to disqualify under if we are only looking at equality. The argument OP makes is self defeating and just meant as an attack and not an actual call for equality. When someone says 80 year olds are exempt from first enlistment or draft- that’s age discrimination, and there are many jobs an 80 year old could do in support or other roles. The military needs janitors and file clerks too...
But even if it wasn’t the case that everyone is infantry first and expected to be able to fill a basic role in defense of necessary regardless or rank or placement, it’s not the fact these people are unable to do the job- it’s the fact that on average we know they will likely require more care. We know they will likely require special considerations that complicate supply chain and operations. The “first pick” for the military to fill ranks is going to always be the people who have the lowest required investment and the maximum possible return. So I do not believe this person is sincere.
They don't understand that they are the two sides of the same coin
Most days, I'm thankful to be surrounded by volunteers who believe in their oaths.
To anyone serving in the Swedish military - thank you so much for your service!