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

261–270 of 418 posts

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#261

Post by arcticfox »

ValentineC wrote: post #247
pilsetnieks wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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 yea…

I don't think we can use the Singaporean army as an example of a proven effective fighting machine.

And anecdotal, but my Singaporean friend showed me picture after picture on Facebook of his friends serving their terms...there were many, many well polished tanks.

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#262

Post by Arizhel »

jackcosgrove wrote: post #38
icebraining wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The civilian world deals with the problem of having few applicants every day without resorting to manhandling people.

If you're proposing higher pay for soldiers, then you go from an army of slaves to an army of mercenaries. Swedish society is already primed to accept conscription, and it's not totally ineffective. It may be the most cost-effective solution to the problem.

>If you're proposing higher pay for soldiers, then you go from an army of slaves to an army of mercenaries.

Is that such a bad thing? I'd rather have an army of mercenaries any day over an army of slaves. The mercenaries are serving voluntarily at least, and they're likely to be far more effective in their duties as soldiers. Sure, there's some ethical concerns with it, but far less than with slavery IMO.

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#263

Post by dropit_sphere »

Asooka wrote: post #207
Nokinside wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Here we're talking about one modern country invading another. It's just the land changing owners - you, as a citizen, never really owned it anyway. It belongs to the ruling class and it doesn't really matter who they are. We're all one people, we should have one language and one culture. Every modern country has the concepts you outlined above. If the new government doesn't treat you humanely, you can always take civ…

>What's the difference if you speak Swedish, Finnish or Russian? None. What's the difference if you're Orthodox, Catholic or Muslim? None.

You may see yourself as a non-1% with no particular ethnicity or religion, but there are poor Muslims who would rather die than be rich Catholics, and there are poor Finns who would rather die than be rich Russians.

I understand that you don't fit in those categories. But there are actual human beings that do.

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#264

Post by entropyneur »

ocschwar wrote: post #258
entropyneur wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> lose a whole lot more in foreign occupation I don't think that's the case in modern times. Unless you believe Russia (that's what we are talking about here, right?) would enslave swedes or subject them to genocide this argument doesn't work.

Dude, you don't have to be enslaved outright for your life under military occupation to suck.

I am not saying my life wouldn't suck under occupation, but rather that it wouldn't suck "a whole lot more" than under conscription at war time. In fact I'd argue it would suck quite a bit less (and I'd have a lot more chances to have a life at all).

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#265

Post by kafkaesq »

thedevil wrote: post #13

I'm not sure why Sweden would be concerned. I read Russian news/propaganda occasionally. Over the last few years, Russian news/propaganda prepared Russian minds for interfering in Ukraine. And the propaganda includes arguments to justify a military buildup. And it seems to be preparing Russian minds for a possible invasion of Baltic states one day. But I don't think I've even seen Sweden mentioned in Russian news/pro…

I don't think Sweden is a target.

Let's just say they're thinking in the very, very long term.

In the short-term, the move is most likely intended as a signal to discourage an invasion of the Baltics, rather than their own territory. But in the longer term, what they're signaling to their much larger neighbor is: "Look, we know your history, and we've seen you play this game before. When it comes to Swedish territory -- don't even think about it."

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#266

Post by rmk2 »

wmil wrote: post #254
thedevil wrote: post #13

I'm not sure why Sweden would be concerned. I read Russian news/propaganda occasionally. Over the last few years, Russian news/propaganda prepared Russian minds for interfering in Ukraine. And the propaganda includes arguments to justify a military buildup. And it seems to be preparing Russian minds for a possible invasion of Baltic states one day. But I don't think I've even seen Sweden mentioned in Russian news/pro…

I think this is actually more about Sweden's migrant situation. Conscription at 19 is a disincentive to migrants claiming to be minors. Co-ed conscription is probably also a way to encourage integration.

I would be very surprised if they drafted anybody without a Swedish passport.

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#267

Post by kafkaesq »

htns wrote: post #115
devopsproject wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are misinformed because you are reading propaganda. They won't be relaying their plans of that channel. Here are some recent events: russian planes flying into Swedish air space russian sub in water near Stockholm Norway beefing up their border troops etc.

Those are more like events that have been ongoing for decades. Russian airspace incursions aren't much of a signal. (see e.g. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/full-list-of-... )

That's not what the article you linked to says. If anything, its message is the exact opposite.

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#268

Post by koolba »

Arizhel wrote: post #257
koolba wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's called being a domestic terrorist and, IMNSHO, is a prime candidate for a long prison sentence.

Actual terrorists generally aren't deterred by the threat of prison. You're talking about people willing to blow themselves up; they're not worried about prison.

I'm not saying it will deter them, I'm saying it's already a crime. There's nothing special about going after them for it.

With our current volunteer system nothing stops a nut job from signing up. That's why they have psych exams and ongoing mental health monitoring.

It's no different if you have a draft with everybody having to join. Heck, I'd bet you'd get less overall craziness (as a percentage) from the population of people that otherwise wouldn't join the armed forces.

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#269

Post by entropyneur »

dropit_sphere wrote: post #263
Asooka wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here we're talking about one modern country invading another. It's just the land changing owners - you, as a citizen, never really owned it anyway. It belongs to the ruling class and it doesn't really matter who they are. We're all one people, we should have one language and one culture. Every modern country has the concepts you outlined above. If the new government doesn't treat you humanely, you can always take civ…

>What's the difference if you speak Swedish, Finnish or Russian? None. What's the difference if you're Orthodox, Catholic or Muslim? None. You may see yourself as a non-1% with no particular ethnicity or religion, but there are poor Muslims who would rather die than be rich Catholics, and there are poor Finns who would rather die than be rich Russians. I understand that you don't fit in those categories. But there ar…

Then let them volunteer to die for it! But the existence (or even plurality) of poor Finns preferring death over becoming Russians doesn't justify forcing those who don't share their sentiment to die with them.

Re: Sweden brings back military conscription

#270

Post by ValentineC »

executesorder66 wrote: post #188
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.

> seem to have any ethical problem with conscription. Here's my personal perspective: I was born in 1991, in South Africa. South Africa was involved in the South Africa Border War[0] from 1966 to 1989. Because of this war, we had conscription up until around 1994. So I have no obligation to join our military, nor do I want to. (It has become really shitty since after the war). I look at my father and his generation.…

> Nevertheless I would have loved to be conscripted into the army. A 2 year (paid) break from studies and/or work. A time to get super fit, learn new skills, make new friends. And the best part of it, is that no one can give you shit for it because it's expected of everyone.

I am a former conscript. We were paid approximately $350 USD a month and rarely had time for personal improvement. The way I see it: many of us lost two years of earning potential, and entered the workforce two years later than our peers.

Post reply on HN