World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
I know, and I'm calling it worse than the way the US drives their military numbers.
you know that those people will not get send to the frontlines outside of germany, right? If drafted, conscripts only would be deployed on national territory and only if germany would be under attack.
how is forced conscription better when the conscriptee isn't deployed?
you get basic training for a lot of people in case germany gets attacked and also a lot of them get a deeper insight into the Bundeswehr in that way, maybe find it attractive and decide to stay and become regular soldiers.
You also earn quiet good money for easy work, only the first months in basic training are mentally and physically challenging, the rest is pretty chilled.
I did this in 2007, enjoyed the physical challenge and my job after basic training and extended my time in the Bundeswehr to bridge the gap to University, because they only started in winter there and I would have been without a job for 7 months. So I stayed longer, earned good money, exercised a lot and went pretty wealthy into university. We also did finish all Halo campaigns on legendary...
Why is this a good thing?
because germany gets basic training to a lot of people that could be helpful if the worst case happens and germany gets attacked on their national territory and also they maybe get people attracted to be a regular soldier, ramping those numbers up, by providing them a deeper insight.
I just wrote this in the comment above, are you deliberately being so slow on the uptake or just trolling?
No. I refuse to accept anything as absolute truth. Sorry if that makes your position difficult to argue, but every aspect requires a legitimate explanation for me to accept it. Who's likely to invade Germany?
fair enough. I just explained the benefits and that it was not as bad as it sounds back in my days. I'm not saying that I personally think we need this again or that it is a particular great idea.
right now? My bet would be on the fucking russians, even if they would have to fight a few other countries and NATO before but at this point something stupid like this wouldn't even surprise me.
Also keep in mind that drafted people could also used to help and support in catastrophic events like flooding.
Seen a documentation about poland recently. A new development there is that the state is conducting military training for every citizen interested. They showed a young women, a hairdresser in her dayjob, taking part in shooting practice. The acceptance of the program within the society was generally good. I would also take part if we had those here, considering what happened in Ukraine, although I'm a pacifist.
https://www.thefirstnews.com/article/poland-announces-new-military-training-programme-for-civilians-37820
When rich kids fight next to poor kids you will have politicians think twice before they start a war.
What nonsense justification is this? You think rich kids aren't going to find a way around conscription? Because history shows that they always do.
Conscripted armies have proven time and again that they have terrible morale, even in good times. They're a shit idea that should only be used when the country has no other choice.
"On September 16, 1940, the United States instituted the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940, which required all men between the ages of 21 and 45 to register for the draft."
https://www.thoughtco.com/famous-americans-killed-world-war-ii-105521
compulsory military service isn't a good thing though. That's like saying the romans went to war less because the Praetors were cavalry.
cautionary edit: I'm not going to get into historical debates about Romans. The Praetors were primarily from the Equestrian class, and in the early republic were cavalry because they had the money to maintain war horses.
It's a pretty cost effective alternative to maintaining an excessively large standing force.
If everyone gets 12-18 months of training, it allows the nation the capacity to mobilize quickly "on-demand", instead of that capacity being "always on".
I imagine there are other periphery societal benefits. Having a shared experience, even if it is military service, can be good for cultural unity.
Not saying they should or shouldn't, btw. Just saying it might be more pragmatic than the alternatives.
I have a strong family history of military service, with a verifiable family history going back to the US revolution. I get where the idea comes from. There was a point where I supported compulsory military service too. However, it ultimately serves the capitalist class, who are perfectly content to throw their own children to the war machine to ensure that the next quarter is profitable. Conscription certainly serves the purpose of filling out the ranks, but ultimately it's a reason to kill people for the imperialist purposes of ensuring an unequal standard of living between the imperial core (in this case the EU) and the imperial periphery.
I'd challenge you to consider that your perception may be biased, coming from the context of a country that has been at war for 93% of its existence.
My frame of reference on the subject of compulsory service is Finnish, which I imagine is a better analogue to a potential German experience.
I know that I have a bias tinted by the US war machine. However I'd like you to consider that neo-imperialism is something practiced by most of the imperial core.
Neo-Imerialistic Finland?
I think you really need to step outside of your US-based worldview.
Yes, absolutely, the USA has a massive war machine that has been mainly used as leverage to maintain an imperialistic status quo. You have the luxury of a US citizen of not living under the knife of an existential threat.
That luxury, your privilege, is not shared by counties in eastern Europe. Neo-Imerialistic, what, Lithuania? Estonia? They DO live under a real existential threat.
Your US experience is ENTIRELY valid.
Thinking you can apply that experience broadly is not.
The US experience is exceptional. That, plainly, is the reality of life on Earth.
Are you saying that they don't benefit from neo-imperialism, or that they don't actively participate in it?
If your only tool is a hammer, then of course every problem is going to look like a nail.
I went back and read your edit. A lot of mainland eastern Europe is in the position they're in because of the capitalist exploitation that occurred after the collapse of the USSR and Yugoslavia. They also benefit from NATO's imperialism. Considering that NATO has Finland as a member now, they also contribute to the exploitation of the Global South.
You're right, I can't divorce my stance from my material conditions. But that doesn't mean you should plug your ears because it's uncomfortable to think about. I do my best to stick to the facts, regardless of how uncomfortable it is to myself or others.
I'm not plugging my ears. I'm just ordering the coexistent issues by immediacy and impact.
Finland's compulsory service, in the grand scheme of things, makes no difference to South America.
Finland's compulsory service, in the grand scheme of things, makes a massive and immediate difference to Finland's continued existence bordering a belligerent nation with clear aims to expand its borders.
Like, you need to understand, the US military is designed to do MANY things, across the globe, as an empire would to maintain a status quo.
Finland's military, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania... These militaries exist for EXACTLY one purpose, which is self-preservation against a concrete threat.
Again, I think you're not wrong in your acknowledgement of existent factors. I think you're wrong in your relative understanding of the specific impacts for these countries in particular. Yes: there is human urine in the ocean, but it's not practically valuable to conceptualize a swim in the ocean as a bath in piss.
One small correction, the Global South is a post-cold war term to mean all of the countries that we'd call "underdeveloped" or "third world countries", not just the continent of South America lol. No shade, it was simultaneously hilarious and I suppose correct in a way.
For one, I like this analogy. Secondly, I think I see your point now. Finland's impact is tiny, and for a vast majority of Finland's history they were watching imperialism and colonialism occur from the sidelines. Yes, the countries bordering Russia should be prepared for an invasion. Putin is currently occupied, but he's also kinda unpredictable. I don't think the countries in Western Europe should be quite as on edge though. It's anxiety inducing for sure to be a stone's throw away from a hostile nation, and a lot of people don't know or forgot what that anxiety felt like during the Cold War. I know I certainly don't know what that anxiety was like. I'm of the stance that all militaries are bad, if you couldn't tell, and therefore conscription is the worst possible thing a country can do to fill out their ranks. Frankly, it feels highly hypocritical to condemn Russia's conscription while simultaneously entertaining or practicing the option in the West.
Every country should do it.
why?
It builds character, strengthens the mind and body, while also strengthening the entire nation against the possibility of future invasion.
I like what I see out of countries like Finland and South Korea and I think this is a big part of what makes that so.