Are you for or against the draft?

Are you for or against the draft?

I'm in favour of the draft. If parenting fails, two good years of army training will beat the faggotry out of any lad guaranteed. Either that or they kill themselves, so it's a win-win situation in my book.

The draft is simply better. One of the main reasons that Napoleon was able to conquor so much of Europe is because while all the monarchs had small, professional armies loyal to the crown, the French republic was able to draw upon its entire civilian work force for the draft whenever it needed more soldiers. It's why republics won both World Wars, republics in their prime always win against monarchies. Only when the republics inevitably start to collapse can monarchies conquer them.

If it's because the country itself is in direct and immediate danger, then ok. Otherwise fuck no.

Against.
1. Conscription is slavery.
2. I will only fight to protect the lives and property of people I care for. The ruling elites can fight the war themselves with their own money if they think it is important.
3. Conscription exposes young impressionable people to pure state propaganda.

As anything related to the state, conscription is pure evil.

this
you see so many kids who look like they are going end up as drug addicts go to the military and come back as better people. not everybody obviously but it builds responsibility when theyve had none in their lives so far

for
sadly it isnt the case here

I find it hilarious that most of the people who shit on trump for draft dodging are the same people who are against drafting and would totally dodge that shit by moving to Canada

this.

though in times of invasion, which is never for americans.

I'd still take drafting into the navy every western man should know his way around a ship.

the army drafting you is slavery , as you can join your own militias for home defense

a standing army is a baane of human liberties and is a knife to the throat of all domestic dissent.

>Mom
>Dad
>Son
>Uncle Ivan
Wtf is this comic trying to express?

It's good. Most if not all men would benefit from a year of military service. You learn both dicipline and actually useful skills, both in case of an invasion or an everyday emergency.

Conscription is necessary to a functioning democracy. Frequent war, whether offensive or defensive, unites the people fighting in it. This offsets the inherent forces in a democracy which splits a nation apart along party lines. Additionally, national conscription can keep the youth disciplined, fit, and trained to use a rifle (which can further bolster the national defense like in Switzerland) like mentioned.

Also, having conscription as a necessary requirement for voting in a democratic republic keeps the women from voting (or at least the sort of women who vote with their vag instead of their brains, being the majority). No woman wants to be drafted, and being drafted is the duty of every citizen as citizens. If you're going to have a democratic republic, you're going to need a draft. Dropping requirements for voting, like the draft, is the first step on the road to collapse for any republic.

It unites people in their slavery of the state. Not something anyone should be forced to be part of.
Splitting the nation, any nation, is only positive. Large states are bad, smaller states are less bad.
By disciplined I assume you meas subservient.
Why should anyone be forced to exersise or use a rifle? Why should anyone be forced to adhere your values? No reasens exist.

Against it. I'm open to arguments but the way I see it, I'm not fighting in a war I don't want to fight in because "my" government told me to. I could just imagine if Hillary had won, had went through with her cries that the cyber attack was a declaration of war, and sent me to die fighting in some real life Shadow of Chernobyl war. All that happening while she and her cronies palm rub in their bomb shelters back home while opening borders to replace me with some brown guy that doesn't speak English and will work a job below minimum wage or another brown guy that doesn't speak English and will explode if someone insults his god.

> European
> concerned about State Propaganda

I oppose forcing people to join the army but campaigns to get them to join are no different from other ad campaigns.

I don't know the answer but I asked my CO and he will get back to you

Not really a draft, but civil service where I'm at, but I didn't find any sort of responsibility building here.

A lot of the people will think of themselves as more intelligent for having "dodged" the service, and you can't really entirely blame them.

I had a greater "respect" for the military before I got involved, understanding how it functions in practice just highlights the circus.

t. numale
>slavery is wrong
Slavery is supported by the Bible you dolt.

Mostly I agree.
The only exception I can think of is that they are funded with money that has been stolen through taxation.

I'm for it because it would force politicians to seriously consider going to war when they know they would be sending their children and grandchildren.

Whether something is written in the bible is irrelevant. Writing something and getting it published doesn't make it more or less true.
Don't uncritically accept authority. Think for yourself.

Only for defensive wars.

It's better for its purpose but it doesn't mean it is something good.

One of the legacies of the french revolution is that it forced nations to form armies of peoples, nationality, etc.

The moment a nation tells you, you MUST protect your country is the moment you lose your freedom.

The state is a necessary evil to protect the greater evil that comes about from unchecked human nature. The vast majority of people would rather hand over a portion of their income to the state than be killed by roaming bands of thugs. When a state fails to protect its citizens, they go to another state. People want states, and states are good for people. If they weren't, don't you think the anarchists would have succeeded by now? It would have been easy to topple a state 2000 or 3000 years ago, so why don't we have records of successful anarchist movements from that time period? The reason is that anarchism is not a good idea and nobody wants to live under your system. Go watch some videos of serial killers in the act on liveleak and learn what human nature is capable of, then you can come back and talk with the adults.

>disciplined = subservient
And? The best thing the average human can realistically aspire to be is a perfectly functioning tool in a grand machine. If you enjoy your work and your role in it, and you have a nice family with kids to continue on your work, you will live a meaningful life. Now that's not to say corrupt or tyrannical states should not be opposed, but in a well functioning state, this is the best an average person can achieve. If you are above average (which is unlikely), then yo may be able to achieve more.

>Why should I be forced to exercise the use of a rifle?
So you can protect yourself in your anarchist utopia, friend. No cops means that no one is going to protect you when the Jones's next door decide your house would look better with your remains splattered on the walls.

>Why should anyone be forced to adhere to your values? No reasons exist.
Because some values are better than other values. And maybe if we work together to form a hierarchy that reinforces the best possible values we can form something that grants us long, meaningful lives. That's the goal of a state and that's why I enjoy sites like Sup Forums.

6 months compulsory basic military training for all men and women.

Eat shit /r/atheism, the Bible is inerrant. Nations exists for a reason.

For draft only when a defender.

Of course, I meant it only in objective, practical terms. I'm a monarchist. But I'm saying that so long as you're going to have a republic, you need a draft to survive. And so long as you're going to war with a republic, you're going to lose.

Civil service could be a good alternative. I think we should complement welfare with mandatory work for the unemployed. Stuff like city beautification and landscaping, simple work that anyone can do and not pay them for it. They will work whatever the average work week is in that country and will work that until they get a job in the private sector, at which point they stop receiving welfare. It's essentially consensual serfdom that the serfs can leave at any time by choosing to work. Disabled veterans ,women, and children will be given a pass on this, of course.

The state "protects" you by stealing from you and putting you in slavery. No thanks. Security services can be provided better in a free market, just like any good or service is produced better and cheaper without monopoly.

There are records societies in which security and law services were not monopolised. Not many, though. Ireland before ca 1650 is an example.

The thing is that I do not see the state as protecting the citizens, rather the opposite.

I know full well what humans are capable of. However, if you look at atrocities throughout history, the ones done by private citizens, evil as they are, pale in comparison with what has been done by the state.

No monopoly on security services does not mean there will be no cops. Like any service supplied on a free market, there will be plenty of offers, and I can choose which one to buy, if any.

Who gets to say which values are good, and what is a meningful life? These are fully subjective. If you like to feel like a cog in a machine, that's perfectly fine. Just don't force anyone else into the same.

I do not disagree with the practice in theory, only in practice.

If Estonia adopted the Swiss model of military service - I'd be actually enthusiastic about it. The way it is done in practice here is highly disheartening.

The role of the State is to protect the people. If the State forces men to risk their lives, it violates their rights and does not fulfill the its function. The state drafting men into slavery does not worth to exist. Only a dumb ass would fight for it.

>sadly it isnt the case here
You are self contradicting. Whether there is the draft or not, you can still voluntarily join the army.

>Most if not all men would benefit from a year of military service.
Self contradiction detected. Draft is military slavery. men are taken by force and threatened by punishment. If they all benefit from it, they would join the army voluntarily. The draft would not be necessary.

>politicians
>sending their children and grandchildren
LOL. It is the first time I see so naive libertarian. They feed only their children and not you. They would send to combat only you and your children, not theirs.

A reminder how the draft looks like

>Who's to say which values are good and what a meaningful life is?
Like I said, we approach the closest thing to truth through public discourse. There is only one truth, allowing people to run off cliffs and live horrible lives when they could be better directed towards true meaning is cruel. There are objectively healthy and objectively unhealthy foods, why would you allow people to become fat and unhappy when they could be better directed towards exercise and a healthy diet, ultimately leading to a better life? We already know from thousands of years of practice and theory what makes societies successful and lives meaningful. We have a better idea of how to make a functional state than any human anytime before now in human history. The apparatus of the state is a tool to direct us towards fulfillment and higher purpose. The state has co-evolved through the millennia in line with human nature to grant us this purpose. We don't need to tread the same ground our ancestors did just because we might be wrong on some small aspects. Our ancestors died trying out the bigger changes to the state and the best designs survives. All that's left to us is the slight pruning on the model to make it even better for our descendants. The state is a grand cathedral that generations shall build upon until its conclusion hundreds of years from now. If its very foundation was faulty, someone would have called it out by now.

1/2

>We already know from thousands of years of practice and theory what makes societies successful and lives meaningful
Liberalism did it. Surprisingly it was created in the english speaking countries that have not used to draft men.

I believe in equal rights for women so I support the draft for women.

I would rather serve time in jail than "fight for my country."

Drafts are retarded in countries where guns are banned.
>Get trained how to use a gun.
>Go home to no gunz.

Then again I'm enough of a traitor to dodge conscription if the Nazis came back.

>conscription as a necessary requirement for voting in a democratic republic keeps the women from voting
In the US only men are required to present SS registration to get a Voter's card or an ID. In all the countries women have got all the rights and freedoms without man's obligations.

>Individuals do less evil than states
Yeah, no shit, Sherlock. But if enough evil individuals are allowed to commit immoral acts without an authority to stop them, and moral people are given no choice but to respond in kind with evil actions to protect themselves, then you start reaching levels of evil in Soviet Russia. Because an entire population forced to shoot one another for their own survival is always worse than a central authority selectively killing people, if we're going by numbers dead that is.

>Private police
If everyone's not equal under the law, that's when you get problems. What you are arguing for is privatized tyranny by those who can afford it. That's not what police are for, they are there to protect everyone. Why would a private policemen help a homeless guy getting stabbed in the street if he's not paying his bill? That's what the police are there for. To protect the weakest of society, not to leave them to die. I'd rather have the police we have now protecting everyone equally than "better" private police allowing those we should protect to be stepped on.

2/2

For. Our military needs more funding though.

>English- speaking countries don't draft men

This is bad logic.

>exercise is good
>there are nearly no drawbacks and only huge benefits
>therefore, everyone obviously exercises

Also, lots of people don't know what's good for em. One might eschew military training/service and lose out on positive, life altering benefits. That being said, the draft is fagole shit, because the government is dishonest to the core.

>sex is good
>just like many people, you don't know what is good for you
>therefore, I can fuck you without your consent

Not the most pleasant experience. But...fuck me i heard about the russian draft. Was it like 4 years mandatory and only 3 leaves. And the leaves were like only a weekend long

Your initial assertion is false. Sex may feel good, but it must be moderated for maximum benefit. Also, the comparison between sex and exercise itself is not very accurate. Injury during rape is more common than during exercise (especially if it's anal rape), and in many cases is the primary motivation of the rapist is to cause pain to their victim. Not so with exercise. Not to mention rape has no health benefits, the only one I could possibly see is the release of sexual tension on the rapist's part. Exercise has proven health benefits for those performing it. Also, exercise only requires a single person to perform it, whereas rape requires two persons for it to be considered rape.

Conscription is like a rape lasting a year. Injury and death during service are more common than during sex.

The notion of what is good and bad is subjective. Everyone shall make personal decisions for what is good for him. For you draft is good, so you should be conscripted voluntarily. For normal people it is bad, so they should not.

But it's also true that people don't know what's good for them. Conscription is like a kid eating their vegetables. They may not like it, but it will keep them fit, healthy, and prepared for an emergency. All of which will come in handy down the road. Children don't want to go to school either, but the service will teach them the skills they need to be prepared for work in the private sector.

for, only if its for a European Ethno-Fascist state.

>people don't know what's good for them.
Right, neither you know what is good for them. The best solution is to let them decide for themselves and their resources. Those who make wrong decisions will loose their resources, not yours.

Right, we arrive at the best solution through public discussion and discourse. We agree on the best course of action through debate and dialectics. I have my own beliefs about which way we should go, you have yours; together we push this boulder called human civilization in a way that moves towards something that incorporates aspects of both and hopefully it works out. If it doesn't we'll collapse and another solution made by another society will go on to survive. It's natural selection on a state level. It's brutal, but it leads us towards the closest approximation of Truth.