KilroywasNOTHere
"BEEP!"
Congratulations.
You just lost the war.
if that's the case then the king really needs to be careful about choosing his battles.
Congratulations.
You just lost the war.
if that's the case then the king really needs to be careful about choosing his battles.
I lived in the hood sometimes battles choose you.
Congratulations.
You just lost the war.
If an enemy military were actually invading my county and there was a risk of my nation being conquered or eliminated, then I’m sure that there would be huge numbers of volunteers.Congratulations.
You just lost the war.
That's... how to put it. An extremely naive approach. The whole point of a conscript army is, de facto, to build up a huge number of reservists who don't need to be kept in barracks all the time like professionals, but who can gain the necessary competencies to later return to civilian life and call them up in case of war.If an enemy military were actually invading my county and there was a risk of my nation being conquered or eliminated, then I’m sure that there would be huge numbers of volunteers.
If the circumstances are such that we are having trouble getting enough recruits for a war, then maybe we should reconsider whether or not we should be involved in that war.
What good are volunteers when they need months to be trained even without their training facilities being shot at, and the professional army can hold off the enemy for a few weeks?If an enemy military were actually invading my county and there was a risk of my nation being conquered or eliminated, then I’m sure that there would be huge numbers of volunteers.
If the circumstances are such that we are having trouble getting enough recruits for a war, then maybe we should reconsider whether or not we should be involved in that war.
Although is as possible, although it has never been a reliable source of recruits. In Poland, one can immediately report to the reserves, and the status of a soldier is extremely privileged over that of a civilian. Few wanted to come (in 2018 it was a staggering 18,000 people) when they can earn much, much more for themselves in civilian life. If one were to try this through high salaries, it would very quickly become apparent that the army would become too expensive to maintain.Then why not let people volunteer to join the reserves instead? Make it so that joining the reserves gives you rights that otherwise you wouldn’t have.
What do you mean by medieval social model? You mean give extra rights to veterans? Yeah that could work you only can vote or have other rights if you have joined reserve.Although is as possible, although it has never been a reliable source of recruits. In Poland, one can immediately report to the reserves, and the status of a soldier is extremely privileged over that of a civilian. Few wanted to come (in 2018 it was a staggering 18,000 people) when they can earn much, much more for themselves in civilian life. If one were to try this through high salaries, it would very quickly become apparent that the army would become too expensive to maintain.
This brings us back to square one, well, unless you want to bring back the medieval social model.
It's more about patching holes, in times of relative peace and stabilizy missions it could function as such, but with a full-fledged war?
Unfortunately, this is precisely what current societies find unacceptable.What do you mean by medieval social model? You mean give extra rights to veterans? Yeah that could work you only can vote or have other rights if you have joined reserve.
And what would that be? Say, money? Congratulations, you have reinvented the professional army, now with less training. Other than that, good luck with the politics and culture involved.Then why not let people volunteer to join the reserves instead? Make it so that joining the reserves gives you rights that otherwise you wouldn’t have.
Unfortunately, this is precisely what current societies find unacceptable.
Here, unfortunately, we crash into the fact of how society is not a collection of atoms. The more it is just a collection of individuals and not united, the more it seems like a torture to them and they try to avoid service.Thing is people create societies and give up the right to their own bodies to avoid becoming ground meat in the first place.what is the point then to do that if said society is going to dump you head first into the grinder anyway?
Here, unfortunately, we crash into the fact of how society is not a collection of atoms. The more it is just a collection of individuals and not united, the more it seems like a torture to them and they try to avoid service.
Unfortunately for atomized invidualist societies, they always fall prey to more united, more collectivist societies. Because in such, compulsory service is not a problem but an honor and duty for every member of that society. If a society does not force itself into the meat grinder voluntarily, reality will force them to do so, or they will be conquered by a nation that does not have their dilemmas. And then they too will be forced to serve but for a stranger who will not care about them as much as his own, and will even use this as a tool to destroy and absorb this community into his own.
In shorter terms, the ultimate reason for conscription is, live on your terms or die on someone else's. Which do you choose?
Obviously the point of conscription is not supposed to be that they die either way, contrary to what ideas some may have...You're operating under the assumption that your King/ society actually cares about you I almost guarantee it doesn't even know who you are and will gladly sacrifice you to save it's own... let's just say spine so the question is ultimately die on your own terms at the hands of an enemy or die on the terms of someone pretending to be a friend. Personally I choose the former.
Obviously the point of conscription is not supposed to be that they die either way, contrary to what ideas some may have...
Others stick with Patton's "The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his".
And yet again, this is a branching point regarding that this topic cannot have an universal answer, it has to be based on both internal and external situation of a given country.
In some, conscription is just a pointless waste of everyone's time and money so that the government can show it can and some people can feel important and skim some resources. It's probably true for many third world countries.
In other's it's more or less a matter of survival as a people. Israel, South Korea, Taiwan, even current Ukraine. Don't keep the military big and functional enough, and soon enough your not so dear neighbor will show up and make you a glorified serf at best, a slave or tortured corpse at worst. Many are somewhere in between. Obviously that depends completely on the country in question and its neighborhood island nations and isolated countries generally have little use for conscription, as even if they do have serious enemies, or are interested in some degree of expeditionary warfare, navy and air force will be their primary tools in this, and those aren't very compatible with conscript armies in modern technological paradigm, unlike the times of artillery armed ships with crews in high hundreds or even thousands, most of them doing manual labor.
Alexander the Great wasn’t assasinated though he died of fever.Perhaps but pardon the skepticism regarding my own nation considering that for the last century we've mostly been ruled by warhawks who fancy themselves as third world warlords and/or histories next Alexander the Great. (Whom was assassinated for a reason btw) as far as Patton's philosophy goes, it sounds great. Too bad his superiors and successors never got the memo.
Alexander the Great wasn’t assasinated though he died of fever.
It's a strange thing, when the people of a nation aren't seen as the power of the nation by their own leaders.
We're seen more as a threat to the "Elite" than the mark and proof of their power and authority.
It's quite strange, in a bunch of ways. How can you be a leader if nobody is following you?