Are you in favor of mandatory conscription for women?

[alice55]

Let's imagine mandatory military service / conscription came back would you be in favor of it being only mandatory for men or mandatory for everyone (men and women) ?

Yes

No

[Anonymous]

I say yes. Not cause I hate women or something like that. But because women say they w at equality these days. Part of being equal also means being subjected to military service if it’s required. I don’t think it’s right that women can vote on sending men to war w out having to go to war their self. Sort of similar to my body my choice if we’re talking about being equal. I get it someone is going to say well men aren’t being drafted everyday but women give birth everyday. Regardless it’s still the man’s body. So if you want equality then yes women should be conscripted to military service. I don’t mean support roles either because if we’re actually having to enact forced conscription, then that means a lot of men are dying on the front lines. So the women need to replace these men. Most likely we’re not drafting men to replace the cooks, truck drivers, supply, payroll, etc. Its more then likely the front lines

They should also work landscaping, work the roads, sewers, etc, etc. I don’t mean holding the roach construction sign either cause I know some female will say women do work these jobs. Maybe a handful but not a lot.

Women want equality but they’re not fighting for men to have equal custody rights of their kids. They’re not fighting for equality of the law when it comes to family court for men. I don’t think women really want equality. They just wants the things that benefit them w out having to put up w all the other things men put up w.

I know I said yes but o also say no because in all honesty a majority of women aren’t stronger then men. While some may do ok, a lot of them would t on actual combat. Hell there’s a lot of men who shouldn’t be in the military either. A lot of these men these days are feminine. It’s ridiculous seeing these TikTok videos of mainly women dancing, doing stupid shit on video while in the military. Same shit you see of women who make videos working at McDonald’s, Taco Bell, etc, etc. Yes boys do it too, a lot of them look feminine though. So for me I say no.

[alice55]

I'm speaking in terms of military service not in case of war, in case of war it make no sense to send women to front line because who's going to make babies? You can't send women n front line; but I think women doing military service is good.
During ww2 women worked in factory to build weapons so they served war while also being safe and could make babies later on.
I do not understand the whole vote / conscription things though, majority of men would never be drafted in their whole life so you're suggesting only military people should be able to vote?
Actually feminism movement have never been about equality never it was about giving women the same amount of right as men but it was never mention of giving equal rights.
"equal custody rights of their kids." in France most custody right are 50/50 so pretty equal, for the benefit of the child they do half half here.

true most men are pussy nowadays it's crazy how feminine they're, it's true ti find a real man nowadays.

[Shiprex]

Women can fly and operate helicopters, aircraft, weapon systems like artillery and armoured fighting Vehicles. Why can't they operate a rifle as well? Static defensive positions can be "manned" by women or men and even acting as fire support for the fast moving men in the attack formation would be useful.
BUT why they don't do it is for the optics. Women soldiers being captured is a fuck ton worse on the media image of a country "placing women at risk" because the men aren't strong enough to protect them and the risks of those same women being exposed to abusive treatment (captured men too being even worse because no one could be held accountable) from the captors.

[Opinion Owner]

@Shiprex operating it vs actually being in war under pressure isn’t the same. The military did a lot of studies on women in the infantry. A lot of them couldn’t keep up w the men, they weren’t as successful as the men. Even shows like survival where women were put up against the men, they didn’t fair well either. But it doesn’t matter cause women being in full combat will never happen so women will always think they can be like men as well. Read the article on the naval ship that was destroyed that was under the command of a lesbian, female captain. Look at who was in charge of the massive fires in Cali when large parts of it burned down. Read about the all women fire fighting team who tried to do a controlled burn that ended up burning down a large amount of the forest. Watch the all swat all women’s team try to make it across the water on a zip line. They failed miserably. Watch the videos on women trying to break through door trying out for firefighting. They couldn’t even push it down.

[Shiprex]

Women are just as capable of operating DRONES which is the new front line battle mechanics as well as the platforms actually doing most of the war fighting. Being QUICK isn't the smartest battle tactic either, being smart is. Take FIBUA for example. Rushing in to buildings blowing things up may work for Americans who dgaf about collateral, but the rest of the world who follow the laws of armed conflict rules based warfare DON'T run in and shoot everyone because that's murder. Women are smaller in general and also tend to be more accurate shots in sports at least and in war fighting it's not any different. They don't get over excited as easily as men.
Confusing doing the war fighting with "being like men" is where you're arguing a different point as you're trying to point out the times when a female has cocked up yet ALL THE TIME men are doing the same and not a bird of mention is made because it's common. Only when women doing the bad does it make the news (especially the rw entertainment type). You won't have heard about the Swedish female sub commander who "sank" a US aircraft carrier in battlefield simulations in spite of the sub being diesel powered. But hey successes at war have to get boys medals and pat them on the back.

Do you really think there aren't any situations where male teams of anything fuk things up? Or can't achieve anything?

[Opinion Owner]

@Shiprex lol I thought you were a chick this whole time

[Shiprex]

There's a situation where a DUDE managed to fuk things up completely.
I've worked in the military with women and men and tbh most of the women there were better than a lot of the men. More focused and driven.

[Opinion Owner]

@Shiprex what was your job in the military?

[OneViewpoint]

I'm in favor of mandatory conscription for ALL adult children of politicians who vote for any war. House, Senate, President... if you signed up for a war your kids should be in a combat unit on the front lines.

I was a US Army officer for 15 years. What I saw over and over again was the children of the poor who had marginal education and little career prospects in whatever inner city neighborhood or rural area that time forgot were the ones fighting this country's nonstop military actions across the planet. We trained em up, educated them as much as required, and sent them to be maimed or killed. Then Republican politicians disowned them when the survivors came home broken. Because it costs too much to treat them. Psssst... the war doesn't end for some people when the shooting stops and the peace treaty is signed.

I was a Commissioned Officer. I'd say it's safe to say all officers have a college education, are around 21 when they enter service, and we had other options. Non Commissioned Officers are generally drawn from the Enlisted ranks. I'd say 95% of those kids who enlist are entering service right out of high school or a year or two later after they find no opportunity elsewhere. So 95% of Enlisted men and women are 18-19 years old, poor or lower middle class, with educational backgrounds all over the place. They have never known privilege. They have no role models to guide them on a career path.

Let's change that. Let's start a conscription program based on wealth. Children of the rich and politicians and judges go first. 100% selection rate. And they ONLY go into combat roles. The middle class and poor get thrown into a lottery after that with an equal opportunity to be randomly chosen. They get assigned based on aptitude and need to either... combat, combat support, combat service support, or admin roles as needed.

Men and women. Minimum 5 year service requirement so they are of some use for a meaningful period of time after training. They get out at 23 on average. They can go home to the underfunded VA programs Daddy voted to trash.

[Jennz6]

@OneViewpoint
Well said

[OneViewpoint]

The children of the poor have always done the fighting, the bleeding, and the dying for the riches of the wealthy. We might have fewer wars if the wealthy had to send their children into the meat grinder.

Suddenly peace terms and compromises that were a "moral outrage" become imminently plausible when people doing the negotiating have some risk / skin in the game (literally).

[Jennz6]

@OneViewpoint
I agree with you

[Kelley1]

That would be ideal, but it is impossible because the rulers make the rules.

[OneViewpoint]

@Kelley1,

That’s what Louis the XIV and the Russian royal family thought. Right up until they saw the guillotine and the bolsheviks showed up at the palace. Mussolini. Hitler. It always ends that way.

[alice55]

I was not talking about sending kid to frontline but just a basic conscription like what existed back then which took 1/2 years and have basic training to Young people

[OneViewpoint]

So you just want to sign up for a zero risk community service job. There aren’t any of those in the military. You enlist. Shit happens. You go.

We have been at war constantly since WWII. There are no guarantees.

[alice55]

I think you don’t understand what a military service is like in Europe …

[OneViewpoint]

@alice55

I don't think you understand what the US military has done for Europe for 85 years. You're welcome. Even though you're utterly clueless.

[alice55]

They did notice except provoking Russia to attack Ukraine and invade us with their base

[Shiprex]

Which wars has the US stopped Europeans from having to fight since WW2? The US tried it's best to evade supporting the Brits in 1982. Didn't want to step on the toes the military regime in Buenos Aires if I recall. Then that war on terror that the... who's war was that again? Didn't dozens of European and other nations jump on board the Saudi perpetrators of 9/11 only to end up in Afghanistan and of course Iraq, Kuwait and allowing US to use European airspace to support the current vogue chosen ones in the middle east.

[OneViewpoint]

@Shiprex ,

What do think brought WWII to and end? You'd be speaking German or Russian right now if it weren't for US entry into WWII. Who do you think helped Europe rebuild after WWII? Who do you think kept the Soviet Union at bay in the late 1940's, 50's, 60's, 70's, and 80's. Who do you think was responsible for the collapse and dismemberment of the Soviet Union? France? Sweden? Italy? Germany? The UK. No, it was the US nuclear arsenal that produced a stalemate for 45 years and kept Soviet armor inside their own borders. Who has had troops in the middle east virtually nonstop for 75 years? Who has gone after drug cartels in Central and South America and Asia? Who has fought undeclared wars over resources in Africa to benefit the western world? Who developed, produced, and sold military technology to Europe to make them a credible military threat?

Yes our military interventions haven't always been outstanding successes or well advised. But what would have happened if we weren't there at all?

[Shiprex]

What brought ww2 to an end was 20 million Russians in their homeland destroying the Nazi war machine while the first 4 years of WW2 where Europe did it's own warfighting while US profited from it.

That rebuilding after it got US to where it is today, taking the brains and tech developed from war fighting and centralising it around US power as well as the access to the markets Europe was able to provide.

Those other wars the US has instigated tended to be because there were valuable resources and materials available (such as oil) so it was important for the US to control the flow of it to the rotw.
Drug cartels are selling the drugs mainly to US so it's an internal problem the US created for itself Why didn't US step in to Tibet if it's such a benevolent and helpful world power? Was it because there was nothing of value there?

[OneViewpoint]

@Shiprex ,

So France doesn't have a drug cartel problem.

Eastern Europe isn't pumping drugs into Europe.

The Russians saved Europe in WWII and the aftermath. Stalin was your friend.

You're pissed that the US profited from helping Europe rebuild. We should have done it for free.

You guys can solve your own energy problems and protect your own trade routes.

And the US isn't really appreciated by it's NATO allies. Great! We can butt out and mind our own business. Shut down our European bases. Bring home our troops and equipment and ships. Pull our submarines back closer to home in the western hemisphere. And we no longer need to give Europe any foreign military aid. We can also draw back our nuclear umbrella to the western hemisphere. That'll give us much better protection in North America. You guys got this now. Thanks! At last!

Oh, and we won't sell you any more military tech. The profits seem to offend you. We wouldn't want to do that.

Best of luck going forward!

[Shiprex]

European problems and the world being in the highly volatile state it is in is largely because the US commercial fingers are put into everyone elses pies. They want a cut of everything and if they don't they use military force to get it. Shit you can't even respect your own citizens with your right to execute each other because they scare you.
Exporting paranoia has been at the core of the US foreign policy that the rest of the world should follow the American lead into fearing everyone and to shoot first mentality. How bad is it when your ROE when meeting "allies" in the field is to withdraw in case they're US because they'll shoot first because your vehicles aren't like theirs and it can't be assured they'll recognise them? That they'll send up passenger aircraft pilots into bombers to blow up "enemy" without properly identifying them? Yeah US has a "grate" record in working with "allies".

Maybe now the US is falling behind the Chinese who aren't that bothered about using the might is right ideology and are taking over soft power not to mention introducing tech far more into everyday life that we can quit lining the pockets of the few 1% in the US who inflate their tech and insist on adding all kinds of control requirements and just buy the stuff off them instead? Cheaper, no strings or expenses for follow up.
Nah pretty sure the needs of the world can be met without blowing idiotic sums on wasteful destructive endeaours.

[OneViewpoint]

@Shiprex ,

Cool, so we're out. You got this.

[Shiprex]

@OneViewpoint
Don't trip on the doorframe.

[alice55]

Yes get out of Europe and get your base with you, we don't need American on our lands.

[OneViewpoint]

Excellent. It’s about time you started taking responsibility for your own security. Don’t cry for help. We won’t be there.

[alice55]

Good and we won't call for help as anyway all the trouble we're getting isbecuase of the usa, all the muslim we got in 2000s and 2010s were because America started to bomb Middle East for no reason.
Ukraine war seem usa pushed for it
So we would be a lot more safe without American here, nobody want American base here except some crazy government who don't have the nuclear power

[Shiprex]

Next time you want to support your Middle Eastern controller when they get attacked DON'T be using our airspace or bases for landing aircraft. Same with the wars on terror and black people.

[4ngelic]

yes 100% but not for the all the same military jobs. i think most women aren't as good as men for a certain portions of military jobs like namely frontline standard soldier stuff for biological reasons like being a lot physically weaker, and also having a very high level of women in certain military positions could make a lot of men try to save or protect women putting efficiency at risk.

I think women should be drafted just for jobs where being female doesn't make the performance worse. like intelligence, airforce, driving male soldiers, sniping, tanks or ied stuff. a lot of women should be conscripted for more sideline things too like becoming military doctors & nurses, working in factories to make weapons and supplies, etc

[4ngelic]

*kinda misread the question

[wynning]

Sounds like a recipe for disaster. But if the situation arise, I doubt you'd get enough people on board organically especially in this day and age. So yes I'd be in favor but it should be based on what someone is good and what needs to be fulfilled.

[alice55]

Conscription have always worked in the end only a very tiny percentage refuse to actually do it, my grandfather for example did not like it but he did it seriously. A lot of people would complain but they do it

[wynning]

@alice55 Oh 100% but that was then and this is now, Alice! I don't think the people of our times are built that way. I'd reckon you're gonna have a lot more unhappy citizens than before. Maybe even more push back. Just my view though

[Cormac995]

Yes.

1. If woman want to be equal that means they should have equal civic responsibilities. In an equal society one side doesn't get privileges the other doesn't.

2. Most of them have nothing to even worry about. Woman almost never end up in combat roles. They almost always end up in something like logistics or tech and never see a lick of combat. The men are still the ones who will be doing the dying so they need to quit complaining.

3. Frankly if war comes and we want to win against China we need bodies it's that simple and being completely objective from a strategic standpoint as nihilistic as this is the more woman, we draft the more men we can move out of support rolls to the front lines.

4. Women's basic training is actually less intense than men. They don't even have to work nearly as hard to graduate basic training compared to the men.

5. At the end of the day most of the drafted womans only sacrifice would be replacing a guy so she can take his job while he gets sent to the trenches. At the end of the day if woman want equal rights than this is fair.

Rights come with responsibility's that's what people forget. I have the right to say anything I want as an American citizen short of threats or things that lead to the genuine harm of others like lying about a fire. So, I have the right to free speech, but it wouldn't be a very RESPONSABLE use of my freedom of speech if I ran around calling minorities slurs, would it?

In this case the right of being an American has the responsibility of serving your country if shit hits the fan. Rights = Responsibility, it's a very simple equation why do woman deserve the same rights but none of the responsibility? That doesn't seem very fair to me.

[alice55]

no woman want to be equal, the whole feminism is actually about giving the same right to women and men not he same obligation.

2 in French army you get to decide where you want to go, people gong oversee get more money and nobody is forced to go out, but mission out give more money.

I was more talking about giving basic military training to everyone not so much as a full blow war.
If they were a big war women would be sent to factory building arms not on the frontline. It always been this ways, we need people to stay behind to build the weapons and women are more important for the end of the war to make babies so they can't be sent to death.
4. True that's because we're weaker then men but in this case it make no sense to take women on mission because then the team would be weaker.

No woman want equal right though it's about giving them the same privilege as men not about the obligation that's literally what feminism is about.

Well in America calling minority slur are actually legal so you can do it if you want, this is forbidden in France and you'll get a fine for it. Different country different laws. So long as it's legal.

Seem though that freedom of speech on internet is a lot lower than in real life though as I saw many off comment erased on TikTok for no reason.

Nothing is fair in life, is that fair that you're born poor or in an abusive family while your neighbor is born rich with nice parents? Ther's no point in trying to get life fair for both gender as life is not fair that's the point of life.
Rights does not equal responsibility though the most rights a person have the less resdposablity she actually got, the richer the person the more right she get, she can literally buy her ways out of things so no that's not equal and neither is it fair.

[Cormac995]

2. I'm speaking from the perspective of the American army and also french woman that choose almost never pick combat rolls which further supports my point that men do most of the dying in war.

4. Wanting the same privalages without the same responsabilities is unfair. Equality by defenition is fairness so is it fair for men to be drafted but woman aren't but woman get all the same rights as men without the same sacrifices. That's not equality and if feminism is about equality than this isn't feminism its sexism. The reality is woman that make this argument just want special treatment they don't deserve because they don't pay their dues to society and the rest of society needs to pick up their burden.

If feminists want true equality like they claim then they should be happy to sign up for the draft and do their civic duty.

[alice55]

It's rare for French military to die anyway as we're not in war at the moment;
but we can chose if yes or no we want to be drafted or no. People that refuse mission overseas though do not get a lot of money compared to the other.

It's not unfair and anwua life is not fair this is just what feminism is about since the beginning of time, nobody want to lose their privilege it's normal.
You should not force women to have responsibilities just try to avoid them if you can, that would work better.
Feminism have never been about equality never, it was about giving women rights only that.

[lightbulb27]

no. it be an extreme awful case that requires that. Women can contribute clearly.

I prefer to have people whom are good at a given role and excel in it, they will be more effective.

Lets face reality of women in certain roles... they will be raped, killed in more awful ways than we can stomach on TV, abused by superiors and tortured as prizoners. If women went through what some men endured in WWII as prisoners, we'll... actually some of them did and were executed cold; but it's just a no. Men, it is different.

[alice55]

I'm pretty surprised that so many men say no as so many of them always love to complain that women should go to war / conscription. majority of men here say no. In South Korea for example so many men hate their women and complain cause they don't have to do conscription, it's interesting to see different view.

[lightbulb27]

I think you get the frustration because some 'women' gripe about their rights and equality and all that. The response is, if you really want that, then deal with the crap men have to accept as men
Truth is though, we don't want to see women slaughtered in combat the way we are. It's awful enough... and we know they will suffer more and it will be more awful seeing the footage of them dying.

[lightbulb27]

note that in WWII there were a group of western nurses shot dead at the beach by japanese soldiers. They went through awful stuff in their theatres, especially by Japanese WWII.
Humans are really awful when we create these battle sides. Of course women in other militaries suffered... Vietnamese, etc..

[alice55]

Japanes really did the most horrible stuff during ww2, it's crazy how nobody aknowlegde it.
It's pretty dumb to respond to women to be sent to war and stuff if in the end you don't want it, women take much things at face value so it get confusing.
I don't really care about going to military service myself, I wanted to go to the army but my body is not strong enough for it, I'm not even fit for police job, I failed endurance test and they were not even that hard.
Feminims have always been about giving women same right as men but never about equality.
I'm more happy in traditional role personally even if I think that defending your country is genderless and is just a patriot things.

[Anonymous]

No, I'm not. I am not in favor of women in the military at all, whether voluntary or compulsory.

From a gender equality standpoint it certainly makes sense. But practically, it does not. Having women in the military forces certain changes to accommodate them, making women more of a liability than an asset in the armed forces.

Military influenced in any way by policies imposed for gender equality purposes is a dangerous thing. The military is critically important, and is no place for political correctness.

[alice55]

True I never got why women had to do less than the men if you out a woman she have to carry less walk less etc.. which make it stupid to had one

Though I was just talking about giving réglait arme training to everyone not sending them to front Line

[Opinion Owner]

Fair enough, but why would the military spend the money on training someone they wouldn't put to work?

[Sachem]

The example of Israel with its mandatory universal service clearly proves you wrong.

[alice55]

Well they often did it in France before 1997 or they send them to some small mission

[FreyaRed]

Conscription is slavery.
Today it's a war of specialists, who needs months or even years of intense training. Conscripts are just waste of resources at battlefield. No matter if men or women, combat efficiency of conscripts isn't higher than living targets for drones and precision ammunition. Without war is a conscript army not more than slave labor with limited citizen rights. Of course there are lot of assholes who want to exploit conscription to get labor financed by taxpayers and women make good slaves as well.

[alice55]

Well in Ukraine-Russo war there's tons of conscript so the conscript are still used for war sadly

[Kaneki05]

It makes no sense to only have men, there's a reason Israel makes anyone over 18. And anyone who's seen real war knows it matters not your sex when it happens you have to fight, granted fighting can be done more ways than one.

[alice55]

Yes I think a regular training for everyone is good

[Kelley1]

Of course not, because men are expendable, women are not. Kill 95% of men, and the population recovers in a generation. Kill 95% of women, and it will take a half-dozen generations for the population to recover.

[Ariesman81]

@Kelley1

Of course the women will be bred by faggots and deserters. But hey, y'all seem to like that shit anyway

[Kelley1]

@Ariesman81 A woman will breed to the best that is available to her.

[alice55]

I m talking about mandatory conscription during peace time like the 2 years they have to serve in Korea.
there's no point in sending women to real war, they re better off as nurse or working in arms factory

[Ariesman81]

I could get on board with that.

[lilBigPotato]

Yes. I want equality between men and women and if I want to good parts then I'll also have to accept the bad ones. In modern warfare there are plenty of tasks that do not require the best physical strength. Different people can specialise in different areas. Can't carry heavy equipment around all day every day? Go fly a drone 🤷‍♀️

[OneViewpoint]

Yup, and there are combat support roles and combat service support roles. An Army needs a ton of logistics. Women can drive a truck, be a medic, run a supply depot, do payroll, process promotions, run a mess hall, do vehicle maintenance, run an armory and repair/maintain weapons, work in intelligence operations, operate communications gear, run a warehouse, fly cargo aircraft, fly helicopters, and so on ad infinitum.

[alice55]

I meant it more like conscription during peace time like for example Korea where they have a 2 years mandatory service
It’s not about fighting in a war

[OneViewpoint]

So you you get conscripted during peacetime. Two weeks later war breaks out. And where do you think you’re going? Sorry but it doesn’t work like that. A standing army is ready to go all the time. That’s the job. You’re not conscripted for peacetime. You’re conscripted for whatever happens. Like it or not.

[alice55]

@OneViewpoint you make no sense France at conscription for so long and nobody had to fight for ww3 🤪
We had more than 80 years of peace …

[lilBigPotato]

You do the service during peace time but it serves as preparation for war. it's a backup in case the main army isn't doing so well

[alice55]

Yes but Even with today Time where there's no military service if a war come to the country and we need to défend it then they re going to send people with no training into it, they re gonna train them like 3 months and then send them to Die so it’s better to be prepared in case of need, it don’t mean we re gonna be send but that’s we re gonna be prepared

[OneViewpoint]

Because we have done the fighting for you. It's you who make no sense.

[OneViewpoint]

@alice55,

You're welcome.

[OneViewpoint]

@alice55,

Wow! Your reality as a French citizen is very different from the US reality of military service. Maybe we do need to sever our NATO ties and let Europeans experience firsthand what the Ukrainians have learned the last 3 years.

[alice55]

@OneViewpoint Well it's not new that France and USA have noting similar you'e the one obsessed with grouping you in the whole west stuff while it make no sense at all.

[ShellyB]

I do not think there should be mandatory conscription of anybody, I think that is involuntary servitude or slavery or something. I think if there is a war worth fighting there will be enough volunteers. If you were viewing it in a different way, where it is more like “doing your part” or helping build roads or things like that, if men are conscripted I guess it would be fair for women to also do it, but if the purpose is about fighting in a war, I think women can help better in other ways, for example if I was alive during world war 2 I might be a nurse or I might work in a factory building airplanes. Sending me to fight would be kind of silly, I would not be good at it but I could be good at other things. JMO!

[alice55]

I was not really talking about a war but more so like a basic military training for everyone like in South Korea or Sweden not a full blow war

[ShellyB]

Well for that, I do not think anybody should be forced to do it, but if anybody is, I guess it would be fair for it to be both men and women. However wars do happen and I guess anybody in the military at the time might be involved in it.

[alice55]

They would send first the professional then the retiree (the one that did some years of army can get drafted in case of need during 10 years) and then only the conscript, they would not be send first

[Lliam]

I am strongly opposed to any mandatory conscription. And if there is, it's officials and their families from every branch of government and wealthy families who should go first. Let those who start the wars and profit from them learn what war is like.

As for common people, I don't think women should be conscripted because somebody has to stay behind to keep the economy running and to take care of kids.

However, if women want to enlist, that's fine. They did during WWI and WWII.

[alice55]

I was talking in a military service stuff like a 2 years one, like in Korea, Sweden or Israel not sending innocent people to front line

[Lliam]

No. I don't think those countries, especially the Satanic entity Israhell, are examples any civilized people should follow.

What could be the purpose of involuntary military service? Indoctrination? Having people to send into battle whenever the war pigs decide to attack some country on the other side of the world?

[alice55]

Good for dissuasion and army is not indoctrination, it's patriotism it's good. And it's mostly in case of need because European leader are crazy warmonger wouldn't surprise me if they declenched ww3 those crazies lunatic.

[purplepoppy]

In times of war everyone should be conscripted but placed according to ability and the needs of the country. Apart from fighting roles this could also include support roles, admin, factory work etc.

[alice55]

Factory work are not considered as conscription Even if people were forced to work into it during the ww2
And I was more talking like in général not in case of a war, like military service

[Anonymous]

Yes I'm in favour of it and if the draft ever came back the law would be changed by tomorrow.

[alice55]

Well if the draft came back as in a military service it wouldn't be able to comeback so fast, in France they said the conscription would be impossible to put into place because nothing is ready for it be it instructor or infrastructure

[Opinion Owner]

Believe me if there was an actual need that required large numbers of men & women, an actual emergency it would happen overnight.

[alice55]

emmergency yes but I talk for a mandatory military service

[Opinion Owner]

Well france has a history of mandatory military service so it would just be the same. It would be much like thd us in the Vietnam war, trying to hold as many good regular troops in reserve as possible to train and lead draftees.

[alice55]

True we had a lot, we mostly sent them to Africa, my grandfather went to Mauritania and Burkina Faso in the 50s

[Opinion Owner]

Many Wermarct and SS vetreans served in the French foreign legion

[alice55]

We had lots of nazi in our army after ww2 yes, my grandfather instructor was a formed nazi, they defiled to Nazi song too

[Opinion Owner]

Then as well Vichy France was part of the AXIS.

[alice55]

They were not part of it they were collaborator not exactly the same things

[Opinion Owner]

They were certified members of the AXIS

[alice55]

They were not, they were collaborator but never member as they were just considered a puppet states and Germany had absorbed half of France making it technically German so no not member but collaborator regime.

[Opinion Owner]

Vichy france was part of the AXIS. Even fought the allies in ww2.

[alice55]

Nope collaborator but not part of it

[WhiteThought]

No, however, every feminist, woman who has egalitarianist views, thinks men and women are equal, should be in favor of it.

[alice55]

Logically yes it would be pretty weird if she were agaisnt' it pretty hypocritical of her

[DrPepper12]

ABSOLUTELY!! I'm even in favor of a peacetime draft of youths into a national service program.

[alice55]

You're actually one of the only one you understood what I was trying to say, yes I'm talking about national service military program to give every young people basic military training and also to stop them from being whiny baby, my grandfather keep on saying we should make it back as it would be a great things for young people, to learn respect and work ethic they seem to lack nowadays.
I think peacetime draft is good for both gender.

[Anonymous]

if you want the "right" to vote, you must sign up for military conscription

no draft = no vote

it's easy to be a strong independent feminist simultaneously complaining about gender inequality when men are forced to fight on your behalf against their will

[alice55]

Right to vote and conscription have nothing to do together, don't make sense in France both men and women can vote and there's no conscription. Following yours logics then only men that went into military or police force should be able to vote in France?
Also I'm personally in favor of it for everyone men and women, it's a good things to go there, also women learning how to manipulate a gun and other stuff is very useful in case the country if one day attacked, during the WW2 when Berlin was invaded by Allied force they give weapons to children and women in a desperate need to protect the country, in this case women trained before hands would have been useful. Soviet Union had plenty of women soldier.

But right to vote and conscription have no logics to be put together.

[Opinion Owner]

right to vote and conscription make the most sense

those who fight to defend their nation have the most stake in the country and those who are forced to do so should be given compensation and if it's believed that everyone should be allowed to vote then everyone should be subjected to conscription

it's really fucked up that a basement dwelling loser or a childless cat lady has the power to send a physically fit military soldier to go die in a war whether they be male or female

imagine John, Adam and David were sent to the frontlines of a war and they all get killed. their nation holds an election where the political party that John, Adam and David would vote for just lost by 2 votes (they needed 3 votes to win) John, Adam, David having died, their votes won't be counted

this is why Trump beating Kamala was very important. young men overwhelmingly voted Trump to avoid the draft being enacted. had Kamala won, she would've enacted the draft and sent all those young men to go die in a war thus changing the number of voting demographics for many years to come

therefore in the next election, there are less numbers of young men to participate because they've already been killed in war

now if young women could be conscripted too, then that makes things more even and fair

[alice55]

It does not, saying this I Hope You re in the military then if not you re an hypocrite

Président only have this power not regular people and if you let regular people vote they would all be in favor of peace nobody want to send anyone to war.

Don’t make sense as nobody want to die in a war. Nobody vote in favor of war and democrat are just crazy they hate men and White people in général aswell as family they re not gonna have many people to send to war if they continue this ways anyway, are they gonna send transmen on front Line 😹😹

[Opinion Owner]

I am in the military and even if I wasn't I'd still be subjected to military conscription. my vote and by extension by voice to determine whether I live till old age or die young on a battlefield is and should be granted

regular people vote for the president who has the ability to declare war or not even if the people themselves didn't vote for war. nobody voted to send money to Ukraine yet it still happened at the behest of the president

not wanting a war doesn't prevent it from happening though. you may want peace but the enemy wants war and thus war is forced upon you against your will

[alice55]

In this case being in the military or being a regular citizen voting won't change anything then.
You can be a military man or a regular person trying to vote for osmeeon that don't want war and it can still happen so that's what I said, the whole vote conscription make no sense also vote is not just about war but a lot of others things

[Opinion Owner]

only draftees or military personnel getting the vote makes the most sense because they get to determine the fate of their own lives. voting comes down to having the right amount of voters of certain demographics and non-combat demographics are being given too much power

in most countries men must sign up for the draft in order to vote and many of those countries women outnumber men. if for whatever reason all the women voted for war and all the men voted against war, the men would still have to go to war and deplete their own numbers for the next election. it's practically genocidal at it's core if the correct amount of propaganda gets pushed

this is why military personnel tend to respect politicians or officers who have actually been in combat rather than those who haven't and want to send them to go die

the more risk you take for the nation the more a of vote you should get. don't you find it sickening to have disrespectful haters piss on the graves of dead soldiers whom they voted to go die in a war?

[alice55]

Which country is this?

After if we did this in my country then we would always have far right as our leader which is not against my liking but well it's not feasible in modern developed countries.
President in France have never done their own military service (this is actually something both my parents and grandparents complained about a lot).

Those are really shit human, they should have their nationality revoked.

Thinking of it you actually make good points, I think too it would be better for people with military trainnig to lead the country. In France the last only good president we had was De Gaulle and he was part of the military.
That would also stop the whole trans and leftist craziness.
That would be a good idea too to handle the whole Ukraine-Russia war cause right now my president want to send everyone to war with Russia, he's crazy and want a WW3 he have no kid and no military training at all yet is considered the head of the military.

[YourExLover69]

For men only. Everyone should have choice to join or not. Also in my country it's not mandatory even for men.

[alice55]

In my country it's not mandatory either, I was just wondering what people view on it would be

[YourExLover69]

I think men are enough for this job. 😊
I know in some countries both men and women are required. It is mandatory for them.

[alice55]

Yes in Sweden and Norway it's mandatory for both :)

[YourExLover69]

What if you were born in the above country? Would you be willing to join training/service?

Also I DM you.

[alice55]

If I were born in a country where it was mandatory I would have joined without problem. I always wanted to join military but I'm quite afraid of the 10 years possible conscription (in France if you go to the military for like 2 years for example then during 10 years after it you can be forced to be sent to war if they need it or even just call you if they need help like for the sentinelles stuff that happened in France during the terrorist attack in the middle of 2010s).

Joining military is one things but being an option and forced to join after quitting is more bothersome.

[YourExLover69]

Forced to join after quitting can be bothersome I agree. But in case of emergency it's fine otherwise it's bothersome.

[alice55]

Yes this is what I mean, those case are pretty bothersome especially if it's for sending the person into a war torn country. If it's just mission inside the country it's good if not it's annoying.

[YourExLover69]

Yes sending fresh/inexperienced or less experience person to war zone can be risky. Sending them to mission is fine.

[alice55]

Yes I was not talking about sending them to warzone just to give them some basics training

[YourExLover69]

Completely agree with you and can understand 😊

[alice55]

This is good ^-^

[NathanDavis]

I'm not in favor of mandatory conscription for nobody...

[alice55]

But if it came back?

[NathanDavis]

if mandatory conscription becomes a need in the USA, then we're in more serious trouble for any of this to really matter... lol

[alice55]

True I was more talking in a European ways to be honest, America is in a whole different world than us when it come to this XD

[NathanDavis]

is it compulsory over there? I know that in Mexico it was supposed to be compulsory (for guys) to get a very basic training every weekend for a year, lol

[alice55]

In some European countries yes in France no, it been a while since we stopped it since 1997.

[RyanEC]

We got rid of mandatory conscription in my country in the 1970s.
It would be fare if women were conscripted to if it was brought back.

[alice55]

We got rid of it in 1997 in France, I also think it would be better if both men and women were conscripted if it came back, in France they talk about it a bit nowadays because of the whole Russian / Ukraine things.

[alice55]

It's always useful for the most people possible to have military training in case the country is under attack

[Anonymous]

I could care less. First off we have a volunteer army. The odds of us having a mandatory draft anytime soon is very remote. But if there is a draft. By way of societal construction, women could be a hindrance. Not for her but for the men involved. Having said that, if a woman WANTS to serve I don't think it's anyone's right to tell her no.

[alice55]

I m not talking about draft to front Line but military service to give basic training to everyone America is a bit différent but european countries could definitly benefit form it.

[Anonymous]

i hate that crap for anybody. I remember after my dad retired from the military, some shit went down and they called him up on the phone. literally begging him to come back but my mom had cancer at the time and he wanted to be home with her. I can't imagine how shitty that would have been if they were able to require him to return to active duty.

[alice55]

True this is the most annoying things being able to be forced to go back up until 10 years after you leave

[msc545]

Yes, but only if men are subject to it, as they are now.

[msc545]

Right now, draft registration is mandatory only for men. Fuck that.

[alice55]

Dépend on the country, in France during ww2 women were forced to work into arms factory so they did in fact work and help the war. They were not on the frontline but they were needed.
Here I was talking about giving basic military training to everyone

[msc545]

There is a difference between risking your life in a war and working in a factory. Women pull triggers just as well as men do.

[RandomUser1000]

I don't think women should have mandatory constipation.

[Anonymous]

I say yes because that is the only way we can get rid of it altogether, and its still not foolproof. No one cares when it's only men being subjected to being thrown to a meat grinder for a cause they couldn't care less about, let's see how the people feel when it has been made a women's issue.

If women's rights advocacy sees things as simple as people simply shouting rude things across the street as oppresson, there's no way they'll let this slide.

[alice55]

I was more talking about peacetime military service when it come to war men are sent to frontline and women are sent to arms factory so while men get the worse of it women are not exempts of contributing to the war economy.

[Opinion Owner]

I think the feminists are still going to complain but that's better than sending them out in the front lines I guess.

[alice55]

theyre always complaining anyway

[xcheerleader_jessx]

Women asked for equality. "Women can do anything men can." Ok sis... here is an opportunity to put your money where your mouth is.

[sawno]

I'm against forced activity in general. You should never be enslaved to do anything.

[Jennz6]

I would serve just like the men, but I would be a Nurse 👩‍⚕️

[Anonymous]

Men should be responsible for fighting the wars they start.

[Dargil]

I favor a moderate amount of public service for every American who reaches the age of 18.

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

Mandatory conscription should be abolished period. If you can’t get enough support for your cause, it’s not a good cause and forcing people to fight only bites you in the ass later.

[alice55]

I mean it as a military service like in norway or Sweden for example, they have conscription mandatory but are not at war

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

My sentiment remains regardless of if it’s mandatory service or mandatory conscription

[alice55]

I think basic training for the population is good

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

I don’t agree with the idea of forcing someone to learn something they don’t want to

[alice55]

this is good though sometime people need to be pushed to do something cause they don't do it themselves

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

That doesn’t mean it’s good for them. Military service in particular is infamous for the psychological damage it does in the name of building a person into a soldier. I’ve never met someone who did military service that didn’t also suffer from mental issues (ie uncontrollable anger, depression, etc.) at one point as a direct result of their training

[alice55]

Weird, I' know a lot of men that served in military force and they were all normal human being nothing crazy about them but I guess our training it different than the now in your country

[onedarkcloud]

Women can die just as easily for our country as men, with equal opportunity for death for the honor to fight for our country!

[Avicenna]

No, and not for men either. It's simply unrealistic.

[alice55]

It existed until 1997 in France and even longer in others European countries, Sweden / Norway /Finland still have it, it's realistic.

[Avicenna]

What percentage of men actually serve in these countries? When I served in Bosnia with peacekeepers from Nordic countries, they told me that conscripted troops couldn't be deployed overseas.

[Avicenna]

Germany did away with conscription in IIRC 2011. It was a joke- a man could avoid it by doing volunteer work (Zivildienst) or if he were medically unfit for military service, in which case he didn't even have to do the volunteer work.

[alice55]

I think in those countries most have to do it, usually only the one that do long study are exempt of it.
Yes they're usually not deployed it's just a basic training they learn.
Yes there's multiple ways to avoid it; my father avoided it because he faked being crazy, the military officer thought he was completely unfit for military life, he got a P4 note totally unfit so he avoided it completly.

[Avicenna]

There you go. I’ve seen multiple friends and relatives avoid it in Germany.

[Loverofwisdom]

Well self-servingly I wouldn't mind it if I didn't have to but I couldn't argue that it would be fair to mandate it for everyone.

[alice55]

Well there's no bad things about everyone getting a bit of military training Even if they won’t use it later on

[Anonymous]

I'm against any kind of mandatory conscription.

It should be someone's personal choice, not something you "have to".

[Anonymous]

No to many rape stories..

[alice55]

there's quite a lot for sure even when it's not mandatory

[Opinion Owner]

I wouldn't want my daughter or a future wife (if i had one) to experience it, in the military, from those above her, or worse the battlefield and even worse then that in enemies hands. That would break my heart. Many commit suicide, you tube is full of horror stories.

[alice55]

I never went to YouTube for this but I have heard a lot about stories of women getting assaulted. by their commandant or colleague. not so much on battlefield though as we're not at war here and I think they would rather assault the foreigner

[Opinion Owner]

historically its a sad plight, If girls groups together, yes, but dont expect it, id leave wars to men..

[alice55]

So many men whine about wanting to send women to war though

[RavVid]

Women should have equal opportunity to be shot at and blown up by grenades, mortar rounds and high explosive shells.

[alice55]

Well I was more talking about military service not so much being sent to front line

[RavVid]

I thought I would take it a little further :)

It was in fact a reason for the Allied victory in WW2. Germany was reluctant to replace men in the factories with women whilst UK and US did.

Queen Elizabeth II was a motor mechanic during WW2.

[alice55]

Well for the whole front line we can actually only send men to it as we need the women to work in the arms factory to build arms.

Germany was quite special in his views of women, they thought women could only being at home but is it not realistic to keep the woman at home when you need to do a war economy.
French women also worked in arms factory and any factory in general.
It's quite crazy how Germany though they could do it while letting nearly half the population at home doing not much.
I'm a traditional person but when it come to war people need to be realistic you can't ignore half of your population, Germany also forced French men to go to Germany to work in their factory.

I know it's a very well know things in France.

[RavVid]

I did know Frenchmen were conscripted for factory work in Germany but not about French women. Exactly right right about not ignoring half the population.

I think some women are performing roles in Ukraine but I don't know how common that is. Do you? This is the first post feminism war.

[Emmann88]

I don’t think it should be mandatory at all. If you are in a combat situation, do you want someone next to you that volunteered to be there or someone that is forced to be there?

[alice55]

In case of real war it don't matter, foyou think that country at war have enough people who would accept tp voluntary fight? Never but if forced they actually does help.
Also I talked more into a sense of basics military training not about sending random young people to front line

[Dongie]

No. Nor for men unless necessary.

[wkhan_87]

No am not in favor
Men are enough for that

[Ariesman81]

Only if she believes in equality

[alice55]

Well I'm a traditional woman and conservative but I would be in favor of it personally, It's always good for women to know how to use weapons and others army technic in case of someone invading the country or need force or anything it's always better to have minimum army training for everyone. Also conscription is usually not that long. My grandfather went and he had positive view of it.

[Ariesman81]

That's neither traditional nor is it conservative. Stick with the frying pan and eye gouging.

[alice55]

During the second World war soviet army had tons of women fighting just like French résistance had lots of women in it. Fighting for your country is traditional and is it what a true patriot should do.
Women were working also in factory and building arms for the war, you view of traditional is just the American one everyone else in the World share différent définition of traditional.
If you saw the face and Heard what the conservative of France défend you won’t believe it, they voted to ban girls form wearing long skirt and long dress in school because it was considered as too religious and against our tradition of sécularism.
Be open minded all tradition are différent

[Ariesman81]

You Frenchies are backwards😂

[alice55]

That’s the joke of the years 😹😹

[chocolatetwopointo]

sure idc, im not weak

[alice55]

Is there mandatory conscription for women in Sweden?

[TwoToTooTutu2]

No, not in the slightest.

[WonderingManII]

No I am not.

[Anonymous]

Im not a fan of it for men or women

[alice55]

But what if it came back?

[Opinion Owner]

I wouldn’t qualify because I have health issues.

[alice55]

You can go even with health issue at your age I doubt you have such a high risk to die for. a little training

[Opinion Owner]

Can’t join the military with seizures

[alice55]

That's sure it won't be practicable if yo had to hold a gun.

[Opinion Owner]

True

[HДLILБΞУ]

No..

[Anonymous]

In what country?

[alice55]

In yours

[Twalli]

That's equality. If you want it, you get it all.

[alice55]

feminism is about giving the same right to women not the same obligation though

[Twalli]

Then you don't really want equality. Why should you get the same rights as men, but not the same responsibilities?

[alice55]

Nobody ever talked about equality / responsibilities though, why are men always bringing this up, feminism is literally just about giving women right that's it and I'm not a feminist anyway I don't bother with this stuff

[Twalli]

So feminists really don't wqnt to be equal to men?

[alice55]

No, feminism is just about giving women rights that's all, they wish to remain women and wish men to remain men, nothing to do with equality just giving women right.

[Twalli]

They're not enslaved or in servitude

[alice55]

well that was years ago not so much now, now theyre whining for no reasons

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

No..

[SmokinAces2000]

No I’m not