Where the hell did this come from? Are you under the impression that the Russian invasion of Ukraine is an existential war for Russia? If so, I want to meet your dealer.
How are you reading that from their posts? They’re saying that nations that have to conscript troops to fight for the nation because the citizens aren’t willing to volunteer don’t deserve to exist. That very clearly means that nations that resort to sledgehammering people who won’t fight fall into the category of “nations that don’t deserve to exist”. How you could misinterpret that is completely beyond me.
This is insanely disingenuous. Ukraine doesn’t have to conscript. Russia does.
Ukraine certainly does conscript.
Ukraine is using conscription. But that is not a negative. In a time of defending your nation from a larger active invader, that is the time for conscription.
This in no way supports the OP’s idea of bringing back the Draft to the USA.
The Ukraine Army is currently overwhelmingly volunteer. This is excellent.
Oddly, I was told that nations that have to conscript its soldiers do not deserve to survive. Not that I subscribe to such a notion.
I find that doubtful or likely taken out of context, no doubt you can easily quote the poster that told you that.
It takes so little to search the thread for this. Making false claims/misquoting doesn’t support your case.
That would be me - Post #194. Twisted, perhaps, but an accurate quote.
PwiS is ignoring the word “need,” of course.
I doubt that Ukraine’s life or death will turn on whether it has a draft. People there seem very willing to defend their country.
Not sure exactly what you meant by your post. Did it mean what Paul interpreted it to mean? If so I strongly disagree. I support Ukraine using conscription to defend itself vs Putin and I applaud the people of Ukraine so enthusiastically volunteering of course.
Ukraine doesn’t need conscription - there are plenty of volunteers. The only reason the US had conscription during WW2 was for organization, not manpower. I roundly condemn its use in WW1 and any time after 1945. The only possible exception I can see is what happened to Ukraine in the first few months of the invasion, where anybody and everybody was thrown into the lines to stop the assault. After that period…conscription loses any moral grounding it might have had in an emergency.
“I also think there are prices too high to pay to save the United States. Conscription is one of them. Conscription is slavery, and I don’t think that any people or nation has a right to save itself at the price of slavery for anyone, no matter what name it is called. We have had the draft for twenty years now; I think this is shameful. If a country can’t save itself through the volunteer service of its own free people, then I say: Let the damned thing go down the drain!” - You know who.
I quibble that Ukraine is not using conscription, but is undergoing total mobilization. The line is fuzzy, of course, but the existential threat of a foreign occupying force committing genocide is qualitatively different than coercing some people to be soldiers.
Yet oddly it seems you did not search for it. In any case, here you go;
Also,
Is there a number we could call to tell the Ukrainians they do not need conscription?
I see some daylight between the two positions, but not much at all. The original quote is that a country that needs to use conscription in order to survive doesn’t deserve it, not that any country that has conscription doesn’t deserve to survive. A difference highlighted by further clarification that Ukraine has it, but ALSO has an overwhelmingly volunteer army.
This seems like an attempt at a “gotcha” that relies on a subtlety of language, but could also simply be a different reading of the same sentence. I would caution against “gotcha attempts” of that nature, especially if misinterpretation/misrepresentation has already been an issue in the recent past.
No warning issued, just a note.