Sweden seeks to bring back conscription in 2018

[Shoat]

This is the biggest crock of shit I've ever read.

Well, who's gonna declare war on sweden so the swedish army can rise up to gloriously defend their nation?

Certainly not any other europeans, there's no reason for them to do that, we're all peaceful socialist democracies here.

Russia? Even an "every adult serves" sweden wouldn't stand up to them, there's no point (also, russia, even if they HAD a reason to attack sweden, has to consider the US breathing down their necks).

Or do you think terrorists will march an army throughout all of europe to take sweden down? That ain't happening either, terrorist operations are something for security agencies and police special forces to handle. They're an internal security problem and a foreign-affairs matter, but not a military matter that requires a large standing army.


Military is for war. War is not a thing that exists for modern-day sweden. Or for most other modern-day nations.
Only primitive backwards nations or nations under extremist rule (such north korea or a potential trump-usa) would ever declare war, and even then what reason do they have to target sweden instead of literally anything else?

[Zoranon]

Paper pushers being dipshits won't end in someone dying.

And I am willing to bet my life on it.

Obviously the ideal situation would be everyone being there because they want to be. But what option do you have until the volunteer rates go up? Simply not have the people you need?

What else would you suggest.

I'm not disagreeing with you in regards to volunteer > conscripted. But I don't see an alternative atm.

You think? What if some dipshit causes your regiment stationed in Alaska to receive tropical uniforms and ammo that does not match your rifles?

That is quite brave of you.

The same thing any other employer in dire need of more bodies would do. Increase wages and benefits and keep increasing them until you have enough men.

[JohnBrown1917]

This is the biggest crock of shit I've ever read.

But the world is all rainbows and shit, NATO clearly has no use.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, who's gonna declare war on sweden so the swedish army can rise up to gloriously defend their nation?

Have you ever heard of a little thing called 'NATO'?

[Deleted]

The lack of complete geo-political knowledge by some people on this thread.

On a side note, I truly support the return of conscription in many European countries, the current near-adult generation lost notion of what it costed to their forefathers to achieve what we have today.

- - - Updated - - -

Military is for war.

Military is for peace and stability, America's military umbrella was/is the glue of the European security, for example. Don't know what kind of alternate timeline you came from.

[Ulmita]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...scription-2018

What are they thinking! That's plain madness.

I could see some serious mental health issues occurring for the 4000 who are chosen. In this day and age to be forced into serving.

I have some of the best memories from when i was in the army. You meet lots of cool / weird people, you have lots of fun and you learn stuff.

[Deleted]

Or do you think terrorists will march an army throughout all of europe to take sweden down? That ain't happening either, terrorist operations are something for security agencies and police special forces to handle. They're an internal security problem and a foreign-affairs matter, but not a military matter that requires a large standing army.

ISIS has a standing army. The only reason why isn't expanding it's because it is being fought by other standing military forces (US and Russia with aerial support, Iraq and Syria with ground forces).

[Shakadam]

Well, who's gonna declare war on sweden so the swedish army can rise up to gloriously defend their nation?

Certainly not any other europeans, there's no reason for them to do that, we're all peaceful socialist democracies here.

Russia? Even an "every adult serves" sweden wouldn't stand up to them, there's no point (also, russia, even if they HAD a reason to attack sweden, has to consider the US breathing down their necks).

Or do you think terrorists will march an army throughout all of europe to take sweden down? That ain't happening either, terrorist operations are something for security agencies and police special forces to handle. They're an internal security problem and a foreign-affairs matter, but not a military matter that requires a large standing army.


Military is for war. War is not a thing that exists for modern-day sweden. Or for most other modern-day nations.
Only primitive backwards nations or nations under extremist rule (such north korea or a potential trump-usa) would ever declare war, and even then what reason do they have to target sweden instead of literally anything else?

The problem is that you don't know what you're talking about.

Military is not for war, ofc the military fight the war if it ever gets to that stage, but it has a much more critical role outside of its war duties.
A strong military is the best deterrent there is against war. No other country will seriously threaten a militarily strong country, where as a weak country will be prayed upon. It's in human nature to pray upon the weak.

A big strong country might not declare war and invade a weak country "in this day and age", but there are other ways to take advantage.
Examples:
- "You know those natural resources we both have claims on? They're ours now, what are you going to do about it?"
- "We really don't think you should choose xxx politician for that office, he doesn't have our best interests at heart, we think you should choose yyy instead. If you don't? Well, maybe one of your underwater data cables accidentally gets split by a submarine"
- "We need this little bit of your country for xxx reasons, you're not using it for much anyways. What are you going to do about it?"

Plenty of ways for a country to impose its will on a militarily weak country without resorting to direct violence.

[Kellhound]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...scription-2018

What are they thinking! That's plain madness.

I could see some serious mental health issues occurring for the 4000 who are chosen. In this day and age to be forced into serving.

If you get serious mental health issues from being conscripted into a neutral army that isnt at war, you had serious mental health issues BEFORE you were conscripted. I am not a fan of conscripts in the active duty military, but I do think every 18 year old should be required to perform 1 year of national service of some type, no exceptions.

[Low Hanging Fruit]

What exactly do you do in the their military anyway? Do you really ever leave more than a days travel away from momma's cooking?

[Fojos]

It is terrible they want to be able to have the manpower to defend their nation and preform basic military tasks.

The audacity.

It's not their fault enough people aren't voluntarily signing up.

The amount wouldn't be enough in any kind of invasion by pretty much any country in any event, so it's pointless. So hey, let's waste money on something we haven't really used in 200 years.

- - - Updated - - -

The problem is that you don't know what you're talking about.

Military is not for war, ofc the military fight the war if it ever gets to that stage, but it has a much more critical role outside of its war duties.
A strong military is the best deterrent there is against war. No other country will seriously threaten a militarily strong country, where as a weak country will be prayed upon. It's in human nature to pray upon the weak.

A big strong country might not declare war and invade a weak country "in this day and age", but there are other ways to take advantage.
Examples:
- "You know those natural resources we both have claims on? They're ours now, what are you going to do about it?"
- "We really don't think you should choose xxx politician for that office, he doesn't have our best interests at heart, we think you should choose yyy instead. If you don't? Well, maybe one of your underwater data cables accidentally gets split by a submarine"
- "We need this little bit of your country for xxx reasons, you're not using it for much anyways. What are you going to do about it?"

Plenty of ways for a country to impose its will on a militarily weak country without resorting to direct violence.

The Swedish military has been extremely weak the last few hundred years. Yet we haven't had any invasions (direct or indirect) because of being weak. You know, in the modern day, in rich countries, there's a thing known as negotiations and rules.

We're not in the middle of Africa where decisions are based on instincts.

[Deleted]

The amount wouldn't be enough in any kind of invasion by pretty much any country in any event, so it's pointless. So hey, let's waste money on something we haven't really used in 200 years.

... Because Sweden is under NATO's umbrella since World War 2. It's easy to say that you don't "need" military forces when the US pays for 73% of the NATO expenses.

[Kellhound]

Go enlist for your country then if you feel that way.

I did. Best choice I ever made.

[Deleted]

If you can't enough people to volunteer, then the state has failed. Draft and conscription being accepted and widespread made things such as ww1 and ww2 possible.

[Kellhound]

You think? What if some dipshit causes your regiment stationed in Alaska to receive tropical uniforms and ammo that does not match your rifles?

That is quite brave of you.

The same thing any other employer in dire need of more bodies would do. Increase wages and benefits and keep increasing them until you have enough men.

Hard to get ammo that doesnt match US rifles in the US military unless you are SOF. Everyone else uses 5.56x45mm NATO using the same magazine.

[minteK917]

To be honest i think a better way would be to put people on welfare for too long on a list and draft them. Giving them a decent wage and decent work experience. I mean the military does alot more then go to combat zone nowdays, combat zone should be only for soldiers that agree to it afterward. You hit two bird with one stone, since migrants would be affected the most.

[Deletedaccount1]

I don't care what Sweden does. Generally I support having a smaller military to have a smaller government but Nordic citizens, specifically Swedes, seem perfectly content with having their governments run their lives for them.

One good thing that may come out of this is a smaller U.S. military budget if Europe actually begins to remilitarize for some reason.

[Ghostpanther]

It's 2016. Sweden doesn't need to force its citizens into the army.

We are forced to pay taxes. I see no problem with having a military draft in any country. Citizens should be willing to contribute to the defense of their nation if they are physically able to.

[Deleted]

We are forced to pay taxes. I see no problem with having a military draft in any country. Citizens should be willing to contribute to the defense of their nation if they are physically able to.

Agreed, if you are physically able you should be defend or serve your country (civil service) if you are unwilling then you should forfeit social securities.

[Deleted]

cant you just pretend to be a clumsy blithering idiot who has the physical prowess of peewee herman to avoid conscription?

[Deleted]

So much ungrateful wimps in this thread.
No wonder terrorists can just drive in to your countries, rape your women and watch you cuck out of it.