Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sweden brings back military conscription

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 418 posts

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#151

Post by briffle »

LanceH wrote: post #96
entropyneur wrote: post #57

I am quite surprised by the number of people here (and even larger numbers elsewhere this is being discussed) who don't seem to have any ethical problem with conscription. Thought the idea of killer slaves was completely off limits in the West. Now all of a sudden we are debating cost effectiveness. Guess I thought wrong.

Conscription is straight up slavery. I don't see any way around that. The arguments seem to be, "you'll only be a slave for a while, if you live", "we need slaves", "you'll get paid to do the work you're forced to do". If you want an army, be worth defending -- both in terms of paying the soldier and being a country that a soldier would want to work for.

As a male that is forced to register with the US Selective Service, (I wanted financial aid for college) it sure does stick in my mind when I vote for our leaders, who can then authorize a draft if needed...

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#152

Post by pilsetnieks »

syntheticnature wrote: post #60
hackermailman wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

South Korea you do 3yrs mandatory service or 2yrs jail and life long shame so motivation isn't a problem. After basic it often involves just working at a desk somewhere only a few stay as professional soldiers rest are moved into cheap civil service labor. I suspect Sweden has brought back conscription to try and integrate it's new massive foreigner population as a way to make them more Swedish not because of any she…

A minor point, but Baltic tensions, not Balkan tensions.

Coincidentally, kinda relevant though, because a large part of Sweden's foreigner population are actually immigrants from former Yugoslavia, a lot of them because of the Kosovo War.

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#153

Post by semi-extrinsic »

pilsetnieks wrote: post #145
zmb_ wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 200k dudes with guns Conscript military doesn't mean that you just teach everyone to dig a hole and sit in it with a rifle. You train conscripts into every role you need in a 200k strong modern military. Including operators and maintainers of the hi-tech death machines, sigint operatives, radar operators, tank crews, missile forces, officers of all kinds, and yes, the guys that dig holes and sit in them with rifles…

You literally cannot use conscripts for anything of "operators and maintainers of the hi-tech death machines, sigint operatives, radar operators, tank crews, missile forces, officers." First of all, most of them take at least a year to get up to speed, if not more, and they have to maintain their competence. You cannot just release a conscript after his year long stint, and call him up ten years later - the ten year…

Well, both the Swedish and Norwegian Armies have a long tradition for using conscripts to do a lot more than what you think. E.g. on the main battle tank (Leopard 2), everyone except the tank commander (i.e. driver, gunner, loader) is a conscript. My brother-in-law was in the forward sigint ops division as a conscript. 90% of ship crews are conscripts, as are most of the air force support personnell.

To make sure these skills are not just forgotten, some portion of each years conscripts are selected for regular returns to the army for drills. (Army pays your employer for the time it takes, you get your regular dayjob salary.)

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#154

Post by literallycancer »

entropyneur wrote: post #57

I am quite surprised by the number of people here (and even larger numbers elsewhere this is being discussed) who don't seem to have any ethical problem with conscription. Thought the idea of killer slaves was completely off limits in the West. Now all of a sudden we are debating cost effectiveness. Guess I thought wrong.

Some people wouldn't volunteer unconditionally, but would fight to defend their country, as long as everyone does. If you only differentiate between voluntary/non-voluntary these people will just be in the non-voluntary group.

That said, I'd be one of the first to get the hell out if it came to war. I have better things to do with my life.

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#155

Post by Neliquat »

komali2 wrote: post #72
67726e wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotally, it worked for my uncle. The judge gave him the option to join the Marines or go to prison. He chose the former and he ended up becoming a productive member of society.

I've never heard of this type of judgement. Was this in the USA? What was your uncle's crime?

Hear of it at least 2 dozen times, various states, usa. Seems a bit less common now, but still happens. Usually for when a judge wants to give you an out. If you bail, you get full judgement.

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#156

Post by literallycancer »

Nokinside wrote: post #131
entropyneur wrote: post #57

I am quite surprised by the number of people here (and even larger numbers elsewhere this is being discussed) who don't seem to have any ethical problem with conscription. Thought the idea of killer slaves was completely off limits in the West. Now all of a sudden we are debating cost effectiveness. Guess I thought wrong.

> ethical problem with conscription None whatsoever. Individual rights has real meaning only when others protect them. Individual rights are never free. You can have freedom of speech, movement, assembly and property rights only when the group you live in agrees that you have those things and protects them when you can't. When the existence of that groups existence or freedom to organize is threatened, it's time to p…

>When there is a war, you conscript everything, people and profits.

Wouldn't you have issues with the most capable people just leaving?

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#157

Post by trentmb »

Kenji wrote: post #128
yjgyhj wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I felt that way when I was called in for evaluation as a teenager. I was a peace loving left-wing Swedish boy. That was maybe 8 years ago or so, I remember conscription being scrapped a year or two later. I regret not making an effort to do it. I chose to underperform in my test because I believed all is better than war. But as an adult I've changed, and realised I wouldn't quite mind dying for things like my languag…

>I felt that way when I was called in for evaluation as a teenager. I am no pacifist. I definitely subscribe to the non-aggression principle, but a defensive war is always justified. I'd die for certain things I believe in, too. I just wanna decide that for myself and serve when I want. How dare the state make this decision for me.

> but a defensive war is always justified

Really? If a foreign power intervened in, say, ethnic cleansing, defense would be justified?

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#158

Post by BurningFrog »

mikeash wrote: post #106
BurningFrog wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Afghanistan was easily conquered by both the USSR and the US.

But not easily held. Both nations would probably think twice before trying it again.

True.

But the cost to Afghanistan has been enormous. Four decades of constant war, millions dead, and near the lowest lifespan and living standard in the world.

Is that really the defense strategy a country should aim for ? Will a modern latte sipping atheist nation really execute it?

Also, there are many other reasons to invade countries than to hold them long term.

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#159

Post by TeMPOraL »

pilsetnieks wrote: post #145
zmb_ wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 200k dudes with guns Conscript military doesn't mean that you just teach everyone to dig a hole and sit in it with a rifle. You train conscripts into every role you need in a 200k strong modern military. Including operators and maintainers of the hi-tech death machines, sigint operatives, radar operators, tank crews, missile forces, officers of all kinds, and yes, the guys that dig holes and sit in them with rifles…

You literally cannot use conscripts for anything of "operators and maintainers of the hi-tech death machines, sigint operatives, radar operators, tank crews, missile forces, officers." First of all, most of them take at least a year to get up to speed, if not more, and they have to maintain their competence. You cannot just release a conscript after his year long stint, and call him up ten years later - the ten year…

I think it's not that bad. When you've had a conscript military for decades, the service is a fact of life. Just like school and taxes. People get over it.

Also my impression is that a lot of military equipment isn't very high-tech precisely so that it doesn't require that much expertise to operate and service in the field. So you need only a limited amount of specialists, and conscripts can just become trained users.

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#160

Post by 67726e »

013a wrote: post #82
67726e wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's air and naval power. Expensive and complex hi tech death machines. Afghanistan would beg to differ... > Of course, a 10m country will never have a really credible defense against nuclear super power Russia by itself. Unless the goal of fighting a war is to wipe the opposing side off the face of the earth, no, it's a credible defense. You bleed the enemy until they lose the will to fight.

His argument isn't that you need air and naval. Its that air and naval are, generally, more cost effective.

No, he flat out said that a bunch of dudes with guns are not a deterrent in this day and age. If that's not what he said, let him speak for himself.
Post reply on HN