Introduction of conscription?

Question

Should prescription be reintroduced?

theoddness · Answer

But they're all too soft-boiled anyway... when it comes to war, most of them will leave anyway

sirandiusnr2 · Answer

However, reforms are needed

joeymitdermusik · Answer

Forcing people to kill is not justifiable, don't you think?

decryption · Answer

Then the young people would have something to do.

therealdominus · Answer

And if so, then it should be for women and men equally. After all, we have total equality...

superkuhnibert4 · Answer

There is no reason for that.

pixelated · Answer

We need a well-trained defense army of specialists and no longer “citizens in uniform.”

ponter · Answer

🙄 Yawn... Not the first question of this kind this week... There is still a subscription in Germany, it is merely suspended and can be reinstated if necessary. There is currently no reason for any form of active military service.

xanaxus187 · Answer

What would happen if a person suddenly broke out? What would you do then? Hide and be overrun? Who else would protect your women and children? Who else would defend the country?

sirandiusnr2 · Answer

So it's better to do nothing and let the invaders kill you 👍

sorrowdespair · Answer

Yes but only for people like Kenny

silmoo · Answer

It's about prevention; there's no guarantee that it can be done without killing. War is unpredictable.

anonym200886 · Answer

First of all: I am against any kind of obligation or coercion! Because nothing works with coercion, and people only suffer because of it! We should ALL know that by now, ever since slavery in the cotton fields! And secondly, we have to go to school until we're about 18, which nobody wants! This obligation would only lead to more depression and damaged psyches, as already exists! And then forcing people to do something they don't want to do would be heartless, inhumane, and outrageous! It should be enough that we're forced to go to school for 12 years! Furthermore, I think it's extremely negligent to let a generation who think shooting games are cool to play around with guns! Not that I'm saying that shooting games manipulate them, but unfortunately that's often the case! Besides, it hardly provides any additional security and costs a lot of money!

Then there's the argument that it didn't do any harm: No harm? Isn't this well-meaning but not beneficial statement proof that it did indeed do some harm? What kind of criterion is that, actually? Many older people say that a few blows were normal in their childhood and did them no harm. For the slaves in the cotton fields, lashes were normal; they didn't kill them and therefore did no harm. But the history of civilization, marked by horrific violence, proves that these various types of harm did have serious consequences. We should shape the world so that we experience life as happiness, so that we feel safe and well looked after. Happiness, dignity and love know no compromise!