Is this anyone we know?!?!?

Remove all ads!

Not "everybody." It just makes me steam to hear people make claims like that: "You have to do this and this and that only because I think it is good for you." If there are about 5 million people, how can you say that the first half knows what is the best for the other 2,5 million? There are more important things to do than hang out in the military, like getting into college and finishing your papers.

As I see it, longer civil service is a punishment for not being willing to "defend your country" -which I wouldn't do in any case (there are other countries to live in). Military is purely for those people who enjoy of warfare -be it for invading or defending, it does not matter. In the end, it's those people who are drafted to the war.

Thus, the less there are people prepared to go to war, the less likely there will be one. I say that maybe Finland should start supporting the iniative of EU-forces and cease conscripting people. This would save money when a smaller army is enough to maintain the image of "We Will Retaliate" that is so important to generals and such. Also, it wouldn't be like USA-lead NATO or UN, but a extension of EU .

[ August 05, 2004, 22:05: Message edited by: Wirhe ]

 

It gets worse with the armies..

Palestinian citizen: Foul pig! You are ruining my home and oppresing my country!!!!!
Israel soldier: peace dude

 

I am not saying that you should go to military because it's good for you. The main reason why everybody should go to the army is because it's their responsibility to the Finnish state. If you disagree then fine but I'm sure there are plenty of people who agree with me on this one. Civil service is an option if you don't like it then go to military if you don't like military then go to jail. That is the law and that is how things are done right now. I find it sad if you can not find the time to sacrifice a year or a half to serve your country.

Once again I'll have to disagree. I do not want the Finnish defence to be dependant upon EU or NATO or anyone else for that matter. Conscription has allways been a part of the Finnish defence since our independence and I would gladly see it remain so.

 

Generally, concerning boredom and waste of time, I think I'm on the same line as BOC. You learn not many really usefull things and drinking and smoking pot may become your main hobbies even afterwards. And then of course is the dreaded military-time-story-telling-mental-damage. Awful. I'm still not fully over it, but it's a problem that can be perceived with many.

But my actuall point would be that armies and their composition changes over time. New weapons may need less people in the different branches. That is, fantasy numbers for example, 1980 needed 200 recruits from 250 aviable people. 2000, after replacing the old artillery, tanks and anti-tank-weapons, recruits needed 150, recruits available 250. Now, with the conscription system in place, you can't say to the superflous people "sory, we're full, you two go home, you other two stay here". That is, suddenly the number of people that are not suitable as recurits rises in mysterious ways, as the simple application is enough to be deemed as not suitable, because there too many people that have to be recruited anyway and there is no way in doing that openly, as that would raise public discussions and a change of the law. But in 10 years, things could look differently, and the number of recruits needed may have risen again.

 

im glad the UK doesnt have conscription, and i think in general conscription should be against global law.
talk about taking away human rights, the right to choose, why, just because someone is born on a patch of land should they be forced to fight for it? thats paramount to slavery.

im glad the UK doesnt have it.

I joined the forces, worst mistake i ever made, i had to get out because of an injury and to be honest it was the best thing which ever happened to me - i hated it and i had a fairly cushy job as an intelligence operator with the raf reg, but it didnt change the fact that i was away from everyone i cared about, i was a different person in the forces, a very different person - and i hated who i became.

i cant imagine being forced into that. - good on these guys if they can get away with it.

 

I see we are at the different sides of the fence -patriotic vs. unpatriotic, the usual dilemma. Okay, fine; that is your opinion, I respect that, but how would you then take the opinions of unpatriotic people into account better than what it is currently? We all now know that it is the responsibility of every man and woman, but still people do not like it, and you have to take those into account too.

So: 'how would you do that?'

So I ask 'why?' Why wouldn't you trust to EU when we recently elected ministers to Bryssel, to sit in that oh-so-wide table of EU? Why wouldn't you trust to the same organisation that already handles a lot of trade between not only in scandinavia, but in whole europe? We have the same money, about same rules, and the laws are being unified even at the moment, so why not also military if it meant the end for conscription? There could always be those volunteering programs where people like you could participate, and those who do not want to do that can always skip it.

Just look at UK; they are doing fine, aren't they?

 

Alright, maybe my views are going to be a bit skewed because I'm American, mid 30's, and an ex-soldier, but here goes:

@Shoshino
I agree with you--I'm glad the USA also doesn't do it that way. Although my time served seems a bit happier than yours...

@Wirhe
I disagree with your comment that the armed services are only for people who enjoy warfare--there are many who serve in the armed forces for other reasons: patriotism, family tradition, a sense of "having to serve because others before me have done so," or simply because it will pay better than anything they can find as a civilian. The reasons are as varied as the people who enlist.

It all boils down to this, IMHO--if it's the law, then you either live by it or you go to jail. Or move to another country whose laws are more agreeable to you.

 

It's quite simple. There are people who do not like paying taxes and there are people who do not want to go to the military. To paying taxes there are two options. Either you pay or go to jail. To the military there are three options. You do the military service, do the civil service or go to jail. You don't have to like it you just have to do it, just like you have to pay taxes.

First off I do not think EU would be very willing to defend us if we had a worthless army just because it pays less to count on them for help if attacked. Neither do I very much trust the EU. EU is not a very unified union and there are disputes about many things within the union. As a grand example we can use the Iraq war which really splits the EU in two camps. Eu will never have a unified army until it has a unified foreign policy and quite frankly I do not see it happening anytime soon.

Why we need conscription? Because a hired army in a state of 5 000 000 inhabitants would be ineffective and small. Voulenterinh programs would be ineffective too. I personnally would not even go to the army if it was not compulsory. I do however feel that it is needed in order to keep an effective defence force in this country.

 

@ Morgoroth

So it is black and white to you... Guess there is no reasoning with patriots.

@ el timtor

Easy to say. How often have *you* moved from country to country? Since when my home has belonged to someone else, who can say "if you don't like it, get lost?"

 

Aah the classic. ""There is no reasoning with you because you are [insert here: liberal, leftist, conservative, communist, patriotic, untpatriotic, religous, atheist etc.]

I do not even consider myself very patriotic, but I am loyal to my homeland. I love Finland and I like living here. There are things here that I don't like and sometimes it feels like I would like to live someplace else, but this is my home here are my friends and my family.

This issue is far from black and white to me, but I see no good in scrapping the conscripting system or making it more ineffective by shortening the civil service. The entire process of changing the conscription system to a hired army costs a lot of money and would be very expensive and ineffective.

My feelings in this issues are practical not patriotic, once it becomes cheaper to keep up an hired army I'm all in for it, there is no reason to keep conscription just because it's traditional.

As dmc said right now the law is as it is if you want to change it you should be politically as active as possible perhaps even join a party and support candidates who want to scrap conscriptions. There are very few questions about right or wrong in politics, it's usually all about priorities and how you set them.

 

"If you can't beat them, join them" -is that what you are saying? In the Middle Age people thought the same, but about church. Everyone was born into it, and there was no going out without severe penalties. Today, it is the government, but like with church; this one matter is more of an emotional issue than political. Thus it really is just black'n'white, despite what I or Morgoth say, ending to that regular "Yes-No" discussion, that is why I asked

Even though I'm not in the barricades or moving out of the country as a "protest", it does not give you right to ignore my opinion, and the same applies to other people like me. I wish you understand this, DMC.

 

Well you can't beat the state and you really can't avoid being part of the state. Your responsibilites to the state shall follow you everywhere you go you really can't escape it. Fo the time being military service is a part of your responsibilites as a Finnish citizen you want it or not.

I really do not view this conversation to be emotional, it's about what is economically good for the state and as long as conscription is cheaper than changing to a hired army I doubt anything can change it. Currently no serious politician would go and even suggest the change in this issue. So the only thing that really remains to be discussed is the lenght of civil service, which pretty much is a "yes-no" issue.

Your opinion is not being ignored if you vote. You can vote for a candidate who sees things the way you do and thus get your opinion said.

 

Okay, imagine then that you suddenly become the sole ruler of this country; what would you do to fix this? Myself, I would make citizenship optional much like belonging to church. I know what you are saying, it stands so like you said; I'm more like searching for solution that does not involve forcing everyone to take politics into their every day life. Solution that could be used in the future.

 

@ wirhe

Just one time. In 1978, my family emigrated from the Philippines to the United States because my father had had enough of living under the Marcos regime. Yes, I agree, it's not something anyone can just do.

Which then leaves you with the alternatives that everyone else has discussed--make a stand and be politically active and make your voice heard, or just sit there complaining (but no one will listen to you).

 

Making citizenship optional? You can't have a passport without a citizenship, how do you even expect to live without an citizenship? Making citizenship optional requires international reforms which are impossible since everyone will not agree to it. Citizenship is your identity and you need to be bound to some state, if you are not bound to a state you are quite frankly illegal as a person until you get one.

Of course it would be great if the world was a big international place where your nationality would not matter and you could travel and work anywhere you wanted and skipping the huge byrocratic circle which currently stands as an obstacle, but just like communism it is a dream which can not be achieved as long as humans remain humans.

Personally I don't see anything wrong with the current system and changing it would cause a huge chaos. You are bound to a state in which you are born and will so remain until you immigrate to another country and bind yourself with that state. I feel that politics should be part of every ones life because if you are not politically aware you are easilly manipulated and if enough people are easily manipulated the result will be a dictatorship.

 

@ Morgoroth

Yes; I know it is hard to swallow at the moment, yes; the current system works ATM, and no; I don't think it requires any "international reforms." Either you have a identity as a citizen of ABC country or not, thus gaining the services and responsibilites with it.

It's an idea that might work or not, but in any case it's a lot better than saying "absolutely not, it will not work, we have done blah-blah before and it is good enough, etc-etc." As to chaos, I believe that is one aspect that belongs to 'Change Management' -or whatever it is called in english. IMO, leading a country cannot be too different from leading one, big corporation providing needed services.

 

thank god the philippines doesn't require military service (except during war). It was hard enough in high school doing the CAT (even with my friend as my CO) now i have to do community service in college to avoid the ROTC. i'm afraid i'll have to disgaree with some of the opinions here that military service does an individual good. it may for some, it may not for others, among which i count myself. the military, like politics "isn't for everybody".