Should conscription be re-introduced in 21st Century Australia? (2 Viewers)

[SylviaB]

we have failed to meet the national recruitment target (set by rudd govt.) last year. thatd what i heard on 2gb radio anyway...

What a completely fucking arbitrary standard. What the fuck does Kevin Rudd know.

The ONLY way we could be short of troops is if we don't have enough to defend ourselves.

yeah i know that no one has declared war on australia at this point in time, but it is a possibility. a nuclear war is a very real possibility.

Our yeah coz basic training of civillians is going to help in a nuclear fucking war.

And as if that is going to happen, Australia has nothing worth declaring war on for.

 

[Jaylee42003]

What a completely fucking arbitrary standard. What the fuck does Kevin Rudd know.

The ONLY way we could be short of troops is if we don't have enough to defend ourselves.




Our yeah coz basic training of civillians is going to help in a nuclear fucking war.

And as if that is going to happen, Australia has nothing worth declaring war on for.

k just saying..

 

[katie tully]

we have failed to meet the national recruitment target (set by rudd govt.) last year. that's what i heard on 2gb radio anyway...
guys, i dont hate freedom!! whaaaaat? hence the reason for going to war is so u can win and be free of any major threats to your country..im sure there are plenty of other reasons.
i guess i just dont have much faith in my peers in volunteering to go to war if the situation ever arose.
yeah i know that no one has declared war on australia at this point in time, but it is a possibility. a nuclear war is a very real possibility.

1. An arbitrary target, oh noes!
2. Going to war WITH WHOM? WHO IS THREATENING OUR FREEDOM? Who are we going to war with? Who are these imaginary foe?
3. I think you underestimate your peers. If we were under an immediate threat, such as the threat we faced in WW2, do you really honestly believe everybody would sit back and watch?
4. Um so if we're facing a nuclear war, ... I still don't get how conscription is going to save us. If they're going to launch a nuke at us, they're going to launch a nuke at us. What is a bolstered army going to do? Make a wall of bodies to deflect the bomb?

 

[Ben1220]

If we gave up freedom to defend our nation, it has already been destroyed. In the words of Benjamin Franklin: "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

Not that this is the only problem with the OP... Its not even the most significant problem, not by a long shot.

 

[katie tully]

I think everybody is forgetting that conscription was scrapped for a reason..
Ok.


Just saying ...

If people want to join the military and face the prospect of getting sent to a shitty war they might not necessarily agree with, then that's their prerogative. They can't argue with that if they've joined the military voluntarily.

I can't agree with conscription based on the Vietnam fiasco. Why should 1/4 fit, able men be sent to a war that has nothing to do with us?

 

[Miz Janani]

I don't think conscription should be re-introduced. We should be trying to downsize our military and reduce the amount of war going on instead of trying to increase it..

Fair enough, people should be trained to defend themselves, but would it be wise to train people to be killing others?

Also, how would you like it if you were forced to go to war. How would you feel when your birthday was pulled out of the box and you had to leave your friends, family, and sense of belonging, knowing you may never return...

Conscription is something of the past, it should remain in our history as an example of how we shouldn't act.

 

[sam04u]

Why do we need a higher troop/citizen ratio? What immediate threats to our country can you foresee that requires us to boost our military?

You seem to be oblivious to the posturing which is going on in the "Asian Pacific" at present so there is no use in explaining further. Basically we're in the middle of a massive dick measuring contest between China and it's allies, and the The U.S/Japan and it's allies.

We need a fucking military.

This act of conscripting is just as much a deed of unjustifiable aggression—of kidnapping and possibly murder—as the alleged aggression we are trying to guard ourselves against in the first place.

No it isn't. Why should you have a right to live in a country if you're not even willing to defend it should it come under attack and the people become subject to the will of a foreign entity? Not only would it not make sense it would be self defeating purpose.

If we add that the draftees owe their bodies and their lives, if necessary, to “society” or to “their country,” then we must retort: Who is this “society” or this “country” that is being used as a talisman to justify enslavement?

The draftees do not owe their bodies to any society or a government or to any ruler. But rather to themselves and their continued existence on the land within which they exist in order to continue existing on it.

It's all about self-preservation.

 

[Jaylee42003]

1. An arbitrary target, oh noes!
2. Going to war WITH WHOM? WHO IS THREATENING OUR FREEDOM? Who are we going to war with? Who are these imaginary foe?
3. I think you underestimate your peers. If we were under an immediate threat, such as the threat we faced in WW2, do you really honestly believe everybody would sit back and watch?
4. Um so if we're facing a nuclear war, ... I still don't get how conscription is going to save us. If they're going to launch a nuke at us, they're going to launch a nuke at us. What is a bolstered army going to do? Make a wall of bodies to deflect the bomb?

1. hmm.
2. North Korea. EDIT: more like threatening the whole of humanity's survival via the flaunting of their nuclear shit.
3. Yeah I guess I underestimate you all. Prove me wrong if (god forbid) the situation ever arises
4. What else would the govt. be able to do? At least by building a wall of bodies the govt feels like they are actually doing something about the threat. However useless this may be.

On that note, soldiers may become pretty damn useless in any future wars, because all the big guys have nuclear bombs (except Australia! oh noes). Nar idk if australia has nuclear weaponry...I mean, they must...right?

So...conscription might not even be considered. We'd just get out our hypothetical nuclear bombs and bomb the shit out of our enemies. And all die.
Problem solved guysss.

No wait; what kind of leader would want to not only blow up the enemy but themselves? That'd be a braindead move. We won the war! But we blew ourselves up in the process!

:/
:\
:|

k guys im trusting you will all put your hand up to go out and fight if a war arupts k?

 

[sam04u]

I don't think conscription should be re-introduced. We should be trying to downsize our military and reduce the amount of war going on instead of trying to increase it..

Fair enough, people should be trained to defend themselves, but would it be wise to train people to be killing others?

Miz Janani the problem with wars is that they exist for a reason. Two states with conflicting self interests fight wars in order to see which can come out victorious and have their self interests enacted through the usage of force. The only way to prevent war is to end the concept of "conflicting interests". That is that all people have the same interests and the only way to achieve that is for all of mankind to live together as one as opposed to be divided by borders and governments.

 

[SylviaB]

It's all about self-preservation.

*cough*preservation of people in positions of power*cough*

 

[katie tully]

You seem to be oblivious to the posturing which is going on in the "Asian Pacific" at present so there is no use in explaining further. Basically we're in the middle of a massive dick measuring contest between China and it's allies, and the The U.S/Japan and it's allies.

We need a fucking military.

In which case, if war breaks out between those cunts now, tomorrow or in 5 months, it's not going to matter if we have conscription because we're not going to have enough time to 'prepare' average Joe for war. Do you think military training takes 5 minutes?

I still didn't see you explain an immediate or otherwise threat to Australia Sam. I can't condone forcing civilians into military service because maybe, perhaps, idk one day there might be a threat against our security. And even then I have issues with forcing people into the military.

1. hmm.
2. North Korea. EDIT: more like threatening the whole of humanity's survival via the flaunting of their nuclear shit.
3. Yeah I guess I underestimate you all. Prove me wrong if (god forbid) the situation ever arises
4. What else would the govt. be able to do? At least by building a wall of bodies the govt feels like they are actually doing something about the threat. However useless this may be.

On that note, soldiers may become pretty damn useless in any future wars, because all the big guys have nuclear bombs (except Australia! oh noes). Nar idk if australia has nuclear weaponry...I mean, they must...right?

So...conscription might not even be considered. We'd just get out our hypothetical nuclear bombs and bomb the shit out of our enemies. And all die.
Problem solved guysss.

No wait; what kind of leader would want to not only blow up the enemy and themselves? That'd be a braindead move. We won the war! But we blew ourselves up in the process!

hmph. k guys im trusting you will all put your hand up to go out and fight if a war arupts k?

I am not sure why I am bothering with you, you're a fair tard. But anyway.

1. Hmm. Yes that's right. An arbitrary target set by the Rudd government. Explain to me why this arbitrary target should mean anything to us? Do you think it says something about Australian's attitude towards war when despite extensive recruitment programs, we still can't fill the quota?

2. North Korea? By the time North Korea flexes whatever girly muscles it has, it'll be obliterated by China. It poses no immediate threat to us. Has North Korea expressed a desire to wipe Australia off the map?
There are countries with far more people and far bigger armies than us that can deal large scale with NK.

3. Re: your point 4. You're an imbecile. You condone forcing people into military service because you think it makes the government look like it's doing something.

We'd just get out our hypothetical nuclear bombs and bomb the shit out of our enemies. And all die

*&(nfnkdfh895yGHJJ09w4 what motherfucking enemies?!

 

[sam04u]

They may judge that they are better able to preserve themselves by fleeing.

That often is the case with any war. If you're willing to relinguish that which you own and your status within the country as many have done in the past in order to preserve your life then nobody could truly fault you for making that decision.

I know my parents did similarly escaping from the Lebanese civil war and there are many immigrants and children of immigrants who arrived in Australia under similar circumstances.

 

[sam04u]

In which case, if war breaks out between those cunts now, tomorrow or in 5 months, it's not going to matter if we have conscription because we're not going to have enough time to 'prepare' average Joe for war. Do you think military training takes 5 minutes?

There is more than enough time. Better to err on the side of safety.

What's the matter though katie are you so wholly opposed to being taught how to fire a machine gun? or being taught how to protect your life in the event that a foreign entity invades your country and seeks to destroy everything you own or have ever known? I mean it's not asking much of a person.

 

[Jaylee42003]

You condone forcing people into military service because you think it makes the government look like it's doing something.

guess it's easier said when you're not the one running a country.
and no, i do not condone it for that reason. fark. read my first post.
and omfg, HYPOTHETICAL MOTHERFUCKING ENEMIES. consider the context :/

 

[katie tully]

There is more than enough time. Better to err on the side of safety.

What's the matter though katie are you so wholly opposed to being taught how to fire a machine gun? or being taught how to protect your life in the event that a foreign entity invades your country and seeks to destroy everything you own or have ever known? I mean it's not asking much of a person.

You're asking someone who is 1/3rd of the way through entry into the Army whether they have an issue with being taught how to use a gun? No, I don't have a problem with me being taught. I have an issue with forcing people, by luck of the draw, into compulsory military service in the event that maybe we'll get attacked by an invisible enemy.

 

[katie tully]

guess it's easier said when you're not the one running a country.
and no, i do not condone it for that reason. fark. read my first post.
and omfg, HYPOTHETICAL MOTHERFUCKING ENEMIES. consider the context :/

I tried reading your post.

All I got was 'blah blah blah im an idiot blah'

 

[Jaylee42003]

I tried reading your post.

All I got was 'blah blah blah im an idiot blah'

then read it again, this time reading what is actually being said, rather than what you want to hear.

 

[katie tully]

Nah there is no point.

All you're giving is
'omfg hypothetical enemies!'
'omfg hypothetical nuclear war'
'omfg at least conscription will make it look like the govt is doing something to protect us from these hypothetical enemies omfg'

 

[Jaylee42003]

Nah there is no point.

All you're giving is
'omfg hypothetical enemies!'
'omfg hypothetical nuclear war'
'omfg at least conscription will make it look like the govt is doing something to protect us from these hypothetical enemies omfg'

omfg this whole debate is hypothetical omfg

 

[SylviaB]

How the hell do you still a green square.