War

Military Drafts Loom Over Europe Thanks to Russia

International tensions empower politicians seeking to force the unwilling into government service.

|

Europe's first war between more-or-less peer powers in over 70 years upsets a lot of assumptions. Not least of them is the belief, or maybe just hope, that the brief and pleasant interlude of relative peace among powerful nations was here to stay. In broad terms, as I've written elsewhere, much of the world is back on a war footing, expanding military budgets and cementing defensive alliances. But renewed fears also offer governments that fear international dangers or just want an excuse to regiment their societies an opportunity to revive the unfortunate and previously fading practice of conscription.

"The Russian attempt to subjugate Ukraine has catapulted the world back a good 30 to 40 years to the Cold War era when highly armed military blocs faced off against each other in the middle of Europe," Deutsche Welle's Bernd Riegert wrote in March. "Germany and other states could find themselves forced to reintroduce conscription if they want to train enough personnel and reservists to build up an effective deterrent."

Wolfgang Hellmich, a lawmaker and member of the defense committee from Germany's ruling Social Democratic Party called for just that, as did Johann Wadephul, deputy leader of the opposition Christian Democratic Union in the German parliament. This would be a dramatic reversal for the country, which dumped the draft just over a decade ago in favor of a smaller, professional force recruited from volunteers.

But some countries have already made the switch. After Russia seized Crimea from Ukraine in 2014, Lithuania reinstated conscription after just six years without compulsion, and foresees expanding the practice to make it universal. Sweden followed suit in 2018.

"The Russian illegal annexation of Crimea [in 2014], the conflict in Ukraine and the increased military activity in our neighbourhood are some of the reasons," Swedish Defense Ministry spokeswoman Marinette Nyh Radebo told the BBC at the time.

Ukraine gave its own people a brief reprieve, abolishing the draft in 2013 only to bring it back after the following year's invasion.

But plenty of politicians hankered for compulsory service even before the world again became a tense place. They see it as a social-engineering project for sharing burdens and getting people from different walks of life figuratively holding hands and singing "Kumbaya," with arrest and prosecution for those who fail to comply.

"The German parliament's new center-left military commissioner wrongfooted a number of her colleagues on Saturday by calling for the reintroduction of conscription," Deutsche Welle reported in 2020. "It had been a 'big mistake' to get rid of mandatory military service in 2011, Eva Högl, a Social Democrat (SPD), told the Funke Media Group. She argued that the reported far-right tendencies in the Bundeswehr partly stemmed from that decision."

In the United States, some lawmakers tout mandatory service for all as a pathway to equity, which it might be if by "equity" you mean "shared loss of freedom."

"By reforming the Selective Service to be gender-neutral based registration, we draw on the talents of our entire nation in the time of a national emergency," Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D–Pa.) insisted last year of language that was, thankfully, later stripped from the National Defense Authorization Act.

But touchy-feely justifications for forcing people to serve the state are a hard sell. Claims that conscription will break down barriers don't square well with threats to place those who refuse behind bars. Old-fashioned defenses against predatory neighbors, on the other hand, more effectively play on people's fears. And too many officials, either frightened of cross-border dangers or simply aware of the opportunities they present, are taking advantage of the situation.

"Around one-third of MPs who responded said they were in favour of making military conscription compulsory for women," according to YLE in Finland, which has long drafted men. "The debate over whether women should also be required to serve as conscripts was reignited last autumn, and debate on the topic has become increasingly heated following Russia's invasion of Ukraine at the end of February."

For its part, the Dutch Defense Minister insists the country won't reinstate universal conscription but is considering a limited draft along the lines established in Norway and Sweden.

But while many politicians seem eager for a return to the era of armies of the unwilling, there's little evidence that such a move offers advantages. In the war that sparked all of this reassessment, it's Russia using conscripts in its invading force, while even on the defensive Ukraine has barred draft-aged men from leaving the country, but only called up reservists (and volunteers).

"Poor morale among Russia's troops – particularly the high number of conscripts forced into battle – may be undermining Vladimir Putin's military efforts in Ukraine," The Independent reported of the invaders' performance so far, which has inflicted enormous damage without achieving its goals. Some drafted troops even apparently mutinied.

Meanwhile, "the Ukrainian army enjoys stratospheric morale and is punching far above its weight against Vladimir Putin's troops, tanks and missiles," notes The Economist. Part of that is the incentive derived from defending your homeland rather than attacking somebody else's. But Russia's proxy war in the Donbas region left Ukraine with a vast supply of veterans with combat experience. And Ukraine is paying its troops "seven times the average salary" in the country to put their skills to work, adds The Economist.

"Ukrainian veterans are still young. They're trained, and they're ready to fight if Russia forces them to," NPR reported just weeks before Russia sent inexperienced troops against soldiers its proxies had inadvertently schooled for years.

True, most of Ukraine's veterans gained their experience after being drafted, but their edge over the Russians is a combination of enthusiasm for their cause and bitter exposure to long years of continuous war and all that entails in terms of casualties, trauma, and disability. Frankly, there's no easy or desirable way to emulate the expertise conveyed by endless bloody conflict. Politicians seeking to preserve the security of ostensibly free countries would do better to look to Ukraine's success in motivating willing troops rather than emulating Russia's experience with masses of unwilling conscripts.

NEXT: Review: The Nineties: A Book

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Thank god the adults are back in charge.

    1. This "new normal" takes some getting used to.

      1. No, thanks to the US for coordinating the coup on Russias border in 2014 and having the Jewish president employ Nazi thugs to foment civil war in Ukraine for the last 8 years.

        1. Last I checked, it was Bolshevik Russia run by the NKVD/KGB/FSB that invaded Ukraine, not the other way around... Even if a woman wears a short skirt, does it excuse the rapist? (In this case, the woman, Ukraine, was actually getting self defense training and acquiring weapons to protect itself from a habitual rapist, Russia).

          1. A western coup coordinated by the U.S. on the border of Russia.

            How would the US react to a communist coup in Mexico coordinated by North Korea?

            The US would invade and all the feeble minded fuckwits would drool at the propaganda, like now. Shock and Awe version 2.0.

            1. Oh, the Soviet Union of your deepest fear was created by Jewish Bolsheviks in much the same way in 1917.

              They created the KGB, fool.

              1. And isn't Putin a fully formed product of the KGB?

                1. And isn’t the Biden family getting rich with corrupt multinationals in Ukraine?

                  1. Yes, you're right about Biden. But we were talking about Putin. Isn't he (and modern Russia) a product fully formed, from the womb, by the Bolsheviks?
                    And what conclusion do you reach when every stable, thriving, crime free, Eastern European neighbor hates Russia and considers Russian society a shithole filled with backwards, violent, ignorant people who are so brainwashed that they worship their Bolshevik aggressors?

                    1. Nobody like the US much either.

                      Russians are humans too.

                      West, East, Right, Left are artificial opposing social constructs whose only purpose is to divide and conquer the masses.

                      Endless propaganda and endless wars, the rich get richer, the masses always suffer.

                      Supporting the western wars of aggression is no better than supporting Russias defence of their borders.

                    2. "...West, East, Right, Left are artificial opposing social constructs whose only purpose is to divide and conquer the masses..."

                      "All One", right Dr. Bonner?

            2. "A western coup coordinated by the U.S. on the border of Russia..."

              You.
              Are.
              Still.
              Full.
              Of.
              Shit.
              Fuck off and die, nazi shit.

              1. One of the many differences between you and I that I am eternally grateful for, is that I’ve demonstrated you to be a liar.

                In the 2014 recorded telephone conversation between Assistant US Secretary Victoria Nuland and Ukraine Ambassador Geoff Pratt, they are CLEARLY heard discussing the planning of the coup that ousted the democratically elected pro Russian president, and the western puppets that they will install.

                Nuland can be clearly heard saying this ought to earn an “atta boy” from (then Vice President) Biden.

                http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CL_GShyGv3o

                1. Fair enough, but don't forget that earlier (before the Americans got involved) the Russians had also done their coup in Ukraine, going as far as to poison the Ukrainian language president (who opposed the Russian language one). The West, with its soft influence when it comes to proxy wars, is far more civilized than Russia, which uses poison or actual troops and kills people.

                  1. Yours is an unproven claim. Cite proof if you can.

                    Sending state of the death art arms to Nazis and Jews to fire from populated areas in hopes of less than precise counter strikes from Russians is hardly civilized.

                    Or were you referring to WMD in Iraq, shock and awe?

                    1. Look up Viktor Yushchenko. He eventually became the president of Ukraine but not after heavy involvement from Russia, to stop his ascendance.
                      "Following an assassination attempt in late 2004 during his election campaign, Yushchenko was confirmed to have ingested hazardous amounts of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzodioxin (TCDD), the most potent dioxin and a contaminant in Agent Orange. He suffered disfigurement as a result of the poisoning, but has since made a full recovery."
                      Poisoning is a well known KGB tactic. I recommend reading The Sword and the Shield, a history of the KGB written after the release of the Mitrokhin files. It sort of vindicates McCarthy, by the way. The US State Department was rife with KGB agents or sympathizers. But that's neither here nor there, I don't understand how you could be a Putin apologist (and by extension a KGB apologist) given your understanding of the origins of the Bolshevik movement. Current Russia is simply continuing the tradition.

                    2. That story has never been proven. You certainly haven’t. It simply may or may not have happened.

                      Has the US coordinated no assasinations?

                      Was trump robbed by election fraud and denied his first amendment rights by corrupt private corporations?

                      Im not taking sides or apologizing when both are guilty.

                      You are apologizing for the 2014 US coup in Ukraine which has directly led to this conflict by deflecting to past Russian crimes while ignoring similar US ones.

                      My point is simply that Russia is defending its border just as the US would and has done, in Cuba before.

                    3. Hypocritical unproven claims of Russian election tampering pale in comparison to a smoking gun recorded telephone conversation of the US Secretary of State planning a coup in Ukraine.

                2. "...In the 2014 recorded telephone conversation between Assistant US Secretary Victoria Nuland and Ukraine Ambassador Geoff Pratt, they are CLEARLY heard discussing the planning of the coup that ousted the democratically elected pro Russian president, and the western puppets that they will install..."

                  The Nazi shit claims this:
                  "...the democratically elected pro Russian president..."
                  Wonderful when you claim to establish the terms of debate, right, lying pile of Nazi shit?

        2. You’re confused Misek, YOU are the Nazi. Have you carved a swastika into your forehead yet?

          1. To be fair, he might just be a Communist.

            1. To be fair, he might just be a dumb fuck. But no, he's a Nazi stormfag, complete with an Ernst Roehm stroke book.

              1. Hey! We Libertarian Pansexuals don't claim Misek or Rohm. They would be Gay Incels if they counted on me for their jollies!

            2. There isn’t much difference. Fascism is just another bastard offshoot of Marxism. Best to just slaughter them all where we find them.

            3. What's the difference? I have to admit those Waffen-SS uniforms are pretty snazzy.

          2. Do you deny that the Jewish president Zelensky is funding and coordinating Nazi battalions like the AZOV with US and international aid?

            1. Well, his Jewishness has nothing to do within anything, you fucking Nazi shit.

              1. I think That a Jewish puppet president installed by the US both funding Nazis is particularly poignant.

                Ask me if I care that you don’t.

        3. As many as 2 percent of members of the U.S. Armed Forces are gang-affiliated, including with Klan, Neo-Nazi, and White Supremacists. Using simple math, that means the U.S. Armed Forces have the equivalent of around 38 Azov Batallians.

          That doesn't mean the U.S. Armed Forces are all bad or that the U.S. is all bad, simply that the U.S. needs to purge the ranks. Ditto with Ukraine and it's Azov Batallion.

          By the bye, why don't you join the Azov Batallion nearest you and Fuck Off, Nazi!

        4. Whenever I hear someone blame Jews for anything I reach for my block button. And no, I'm not Jewish.

          1. Hahaha, because Jews can’t be blamed for anything.

            Just keep pressing that bigotry button and do us all a favour.

            1. Says the bigoted Nazi LARPer.

              Follow your leader, shitstain.

              1. Hahaha

              2. Hey SN, you're on his side!

          2. I disagree with Misek on many topics, but blocking people with whose outlooks you disagree is beyond gay.

  2. Jesus christ when did the world become full of such cowards and tepid bitches.

    Putin isn't going to start ww3. He can barely maintain the Donbass and hell be lucky to hold that when this finally ends. And for this to happen no troops even need to be put in harms way. We can just keep sending them drones, missiles, and intelligence. And I'd also begin sending them equipment to increase their offensive cyber attacks, and begin carrying out more of our own on Russian infrastructure.

    And don't give me your "that's neocon warmongering" shtick nardz, Russia has launched cyber attacks on our country numerous times and we didn't launch nukes at them. I know you're Putins little cowering bitch, but putin doesn't have the balls to launch nukes or carry out a physical attack on an American target. His equipment is shambolic, his men are I'll trained and quite stupid, and his intelligence is lacking or he's ignoring much of it.

    Weve been giving the ukes Intel since the beginning and they've used it to kill literally thousands of Russian troops, whether shooting down paratroopers, blowing up their ships, killing their generals. And putin and his limo dick advisors always say "next time us or Europe help Ukraine there will be consequences".

    Then someone is like, you know European javelines are raping your tanks right? And Russia responds "yes, next time us or Europe help Ukraine there will be consequences".

    Then someone is like, you know American intelligence is how the ukes blew up your black sea flagship the moskova, right? And Russia replies "yes, next time us or Europe help Ukraine there will be consequences".

    It's time to realize there will be no consequences. Putin severely misjudged the operation. He's being embarrassed at every turn. And the entire cultural heritage of Russia will be wiped from history if he tries something stupid. And China isn't going to step in on Russias side in ww3. Russias economy is smaller than Italy's. China isn't going to play piggy bank for a mongoloid putin who China knows doesn't have the economic output to ever repay them for war funding. They siphon cheap resources and oil from Russia for now, but they aren't going to bankroll a larger operation. So Russia has already lost this conflict. It just depends how bitchy and temper tantrummy putin wants to be on his way out of Ukraine.

    1. Yet somehow the ruble is up, the dollar is down and the west is facing a potential food crisis in the midst of a recession as we grapple with the self-inflicted consequences of our Covid policies and "vaccinations." Russia also has turned the tap off on fuel and fertilizer exports, which we are wholly unprepared to face (though the Clintons still get theirs while we continue to sell uranium to Russia), and we have broken faith in banking institutions by lawlessly seizing assets of those our leaders found objectionable.
      China is convulsing with internal struggles and zero-Covid madness, which has put a cork on international shipments (if you thought SF harbor was bad...), but it still has encroached nearly to the point of taking Taiwan in hours.

      You can bet your sweet cheeks it will be the US and EU doing nothing more than cutting themselves fat defense budget grift cheques as polar tyrants play cat and mouse.

      1. "Yet somehow the ruble is up"

        Where does this silliness come from? The ruble is not up, it's clearly down.

        Exchange rate:
        Feb 21st 74.6 (start of war)
        May 2nd 62.1

        1. You realize that fewer rubles needed to buy a dollar means the ruble is up, right?

          1. He’s more like low wattage.

        2. And this is who Dems get votes from... Oy.

        3. "Where does this silliness come from? The ruble is not up, it's clearly down.
          Exchange rate:
          Feb 21st 74.6 (start of war)
          May 2nd 62.1"

          turd-like in self-contradiction!

      2. You don't understand the Master Plan.

        They had to improve the value of the Ruble in order to make gas sales more profitable for the Russians in order to make the Russians complacent with their finances in order to make them think they can just buy their way out of anything and then - WHAM - our special and secretive Super Sanctions will demolish their economy once and for all!

        1. If we pass it can we see what's in it?

    2. The Global Socialist Woke's Party appreciates your post.

    3. Ah yah! Sic Dizzle! Sic 'em! All excellent points.

  3. And oh shit! Jd actually called the conflict in the Donbass what it actually is, "Russias proxy war"!

    Where's Putins cock holster Nardz to come tell us it was nothing but genocide against Russians?

    1. It's sad watching people lose their fucking minds because someone else has the temerity to... disagree with the State Department

      1. Nardz, you are disagreeing with the whole civilized world (including Russia's peaceful European neighbors, who have been living on fear of that aggressive society for centuries). When every country around you (except Belarus, I grant you that) you hates your guts, is it just a coincidence? And this has been going on for centuries, not just the little Georgia and Moldova and Ukraine incursions during Putin's reign.

      2. "It's sad watching people lose their fucking minds because someone else has the temerity to... disagree with the State Department"

        No, dipshit, is sad watching assholes like you and Misek apologize for an aggressor like Putin.
        Shove it up your ass

    2. Stephen Coal-burt, is that you?

    3. Putin's cock holster is that hot Olympic Gymnast. Biden has his mom.

  4. Yeah, I get it. Libertarians don't like conscription. How exactly is a nation supposed to build a military good enough to defend the nation without a military? Volunteering isn't gonna cut it if you need numbers, especially if people don't volunteer until the enemy is over the border and rolling towards your capitol.

    1. Nations should start by trying to govern in a way that would make people actually want to take up arms to defend it. I'm inclined to fight to the death for a country that has done right by me and actually respects my freedom. If a corrupt state that's always micromanaging by life and reaching into my pocket wants help when they find themselves at odds with another corrupt state, they're gonna have to look for someone else to die for them.

    2. Conscripted armies aren't generally thought of as "good" being that so many of the soldiers are given a choice between being shot in the face by the enemy or in the back by their own. They may be effective in a war of attrition, but that's about it.

      1. The US has used conscripts in every war prior to the 1990s. Seemed to do pretty well. Rome conquered their entire know world with conscript in their armies.

        1. They're both effective at killing people and destroying stuff, but volunteer armies do it a lot better because they're there by their own free will without a gun in their back.

        2. The US ended conscription in 1971. So they haven't used conscripts since then.

          1. Technically, it ended in 1973.

            "1973 - The 1967 Selective Service Act, extended through an act of Congress in 1971, expires, ending the authority to induct draft registrants. "

        3. Conscription is great for human wave-type warfare, i.e. the 3500 years between Megiddo and Chosin. I'm not so sure about modern warfare, which is largely mechanized and where every soldier is effectively a technician.

          But conscription would probably still be effective for non-combat roles -- producing materiel, cooks, custodians, etc.

    3. If you can't get people to volunteer - does your nation deserve to exist if its own citizens don't think it does?

    4. Agree. There is massive difference between conscription a la militia v conscription to send fodder halfway around the world.

      The first is also one of those eternal tradeoffs that occur in the real world but never in libertarian ideology. A volunteer standing army is magnitudes more expensive (meaning both more taxes and more deficits/inflation). It incentives cronyism and permawar. It acclimates us to perpetual petty infringements of our liberties and rights. Eg quartering troops turns into extract taxes to pay rent to some private landowner v a militia that simply lives at home most of the time and earns their own rent

    5. A nation that can't get by without conscription is a nation that should not exist.

    6. Ever wonder why there were so many protests against the Vietnam War?

  5. "Draft the Woke"

    1. Better, just expatriate them to Russia. Once they reach the point of saturation, Russia will be incapable of functioning.

  6. Wasn't it an army of the "unwilling" who won WW II?

    1. And WWI, there were not millions of willing people to go 'over the top' to their inevitable death in no man's land. Hell, they had people in the trenches to shoot you if you didn't go or came back.

    2. Yes, massive conscription filled the Soviet Armies.

  7. Does this mean NATO members will begin fulfilling their defense obligations, or is Brandon cutting another cheque?

    Also, why are we still trying to start WW3?

    1. The Covid didn’t deplete the population like was hoped for, but a big war is a sure fire bet to kill millions.

      1. If you want to damage the world's population, you need to kill of women (or birthing persons, or whatever you call them now), not men.

        1. How about baby formula supplies down by 41% and miscarriage rates now hitting 50% for a "new normal?"

  8. They see it as a social-engineering project for sharing burdens and getting people from different walks of life figuratively holding hands and singing "Kumbaya,"

    In 'merica, we use public schools for that.

  9. https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/1522570470050181128?t=vUoXeUavpT2ekbFlf1YHoA&s=19

    Left-Wing Group Bribes Abortion Radicals With Stipends For Participating In Intimidation Protests At Justices’ Homes

    [Link]

  10. Remember wikileaks Vault_7?
    Nah, memory holed.
    Definitely trust and side with those same hoaxers now though.
    Slava Ukraini!

    https://twitter.com/FDRLST/status/1522569372568416256?t=M0xYlALEMEvBEGWwQwxTqw&s=19

    Exclusive: Spygate Researchers Said Claim Russians Hacked The DNC Could Have Relied On ‘Spoofed’ Data

    [Link]

  11. Russia is totes Americans' enemy!

    https://twitter.com/redsteeze/status/1522572826145812480?t=sS-sZ2vmGN-hZlMUFykOFw&s=19

    Samantha Power's answer to this was this was a good thing so farming could return to natural manures for the climate, in case you thought the hurt was just happening on purpose with gas prices.
    "@axios
    Skyrocketing fertilizer costs are driving up food prices and, worse, threatening food security around the globe. [Link]"

  12. I'm unclear why I should give two shits about what happens in Europe in regards to possible drafts.

    They've had decades of us footing the bill for them. I kinda like them having to do some lifting on their own/

    1. The build up of large European armies in the last century produced WWI and WWII. And on a smaller scale, Bosnia and Kosovo wars. All ending with US military involvement.

    2. We still owe the UK one because Blair was so kind to help us out in Iraq.

  13. "Europe's first war between more-or-less peer powers in over 70 years upsets a lot of assumptions"

    The biggest one being finding out that the Russian army is a near-peer to the Ukrainian army.

    I honestly can't imagine anyone in Europe - already reluctant to spend even 2 percent of GDP on defense - is looking to institute or ramp up conscription against an army that has shown itself barely able to prosecute an invasion *from its own border*.

    The EU, however, is quite keen on getting its own military though.

  14. "True, most of Ukraine's veterans gained their experience after being drafted, but their edge over the Russians is a combination of enthusiasm for their cause and bitter exposure to long years of continuous war and all that entails in terms of casualties, trauma, and disability."

    Ukraine has that edge because they have 8 years worth of trained reserves as a result of their draft. They've been in Russia's crosshair's since 2014. A draft for them was a prudent necessity. Not so for most of the countries in western Europe.

  15. I've seen support for the draft in the US fall dramatically among conservatives but rise among progressives. Mostly along the social engineering lines mentioned: the hoi polloi rubbing elbows with the masses is surely the ticket to societal harmony!

    Even some old anti-war hippies are drinking the KoolAid now, asserting that we, as a nation, would be less likely to go to war if it was the children of the rich at risk, too... totally oblivious to the fact that said rich (and connected) brat conscripts would be shuttled into lower risk situations as a matter of course.

    I will say that though I have a philosophical opposition to conscription because I don't believe a person's life belongs to the state, I would be far more willing to entertain it as a possibility if the first, say, 20,000 infantry draftees were drawn directly from the direct families (when possible) and extended families (when not) of Congress and the executive agencies. Tap the state government kids for 20,000 or so more, THEN get to the general populace. Unfortunately, as I point out in the previous paragraph, there would be a sudden influx of need for combat ready troops in Waikiki or somewhere near the dangerous Iowa frontlines.

    1. I've seen support for the draft in the US fall dramatically among conservatives but rise among progressives.

      That's been going on since at least the 1990s.

      1. Because conservatives realize that they will be drafted and progs believe they will be excused.

  16. What is happening is not "Thanks to Russia". It is "Thanks to American hubris". The U.S. should have effectively disbanded NATO after the Cold War. Instead, we insisted on expanding it, endlessly. If you corner a rat, and Putin certainly qualifies, he will fight, and that is what is happening. Trillions of dollars and thousands of lives have been wasted, thanks to American appetites for "greatness", and it looks like the farce is far from over.

    1. Yes, absent NATO, Putin was such a nice fella. Are you serious? This is pretty much a vicious sociopath taking advantage because we have a worthless, weak, senile democrat, surrounded by other worthless democrats, being worthless and weak.

      We desperately need to expunge the democrats and their party from America.

    2. "The U.S. should have effectively disbanded NATO after the Cold War."

      NATO existed partially in order to contain Soviet expansion. It's other main function was to keep the Western Europeans from going at each other again. The end of the Soviet Union did not solve that problem

      1. Today, it exists primarily as a social club and a way for U.S. defense contractors to launder money.

    3. Talk about hubris. The US cannot 'disband' NATO. Nor did the US expand it as if it was blowing up balloons.

      Maybe we could lose the hubris. And in so doing, stop assisting a Putin type for guilt- shaming the US simply because HE needs an enemy.

    4. It's sad watching assholes like you, nardz and Misek apologize for an aggressor like Putin.
      Shove it up your ass.

  17. Military Drafts Loom Over Europe Thanks to Russia

    Trump made Europe conscript their people!

  18. I'm just going to leave this here

    Besides, I ain't no fool, I'm goin' to school
    And I'm working in a defense plant

  19. So what's wrong with this? Europe should be responsible for their own defense against Russia, not the US. Let them fight their own wars without US involvement.

  20. In the United States, some lawmakers tout mandatory service for all as a pathway to equity, which it might be if by "equity" you mean "shared loss of freedom."

    Do progressives ever use it to mean anything else?

  21. I'm wondering how much reactions here are conditioned by the American experience, where the draft did not draw in every(male)body in an age group and was used to fill units sent to fight overseas.

    The German approach whose revival is being discussed was a universal service requirement without overseas deployment. That certainly should provoke a libertarian "involuntary servitude!" response. On the other hand, it's not hugely different from a system of universal militia training; it yanks everybody in for just long enough to make them minimally trained, and then drops them back into their lives.

    1. Agree. It's kinda like all our political ideas are trapped in the 1960's

  22. Using the left's argument that men should have no say in abortion as they will never face it, then women should have no say in the draft until such time as they are liable for call-up

  23. The US should begin preparing for possible war. A good start would be requiring women to register with Selective Service.
    It's long past time to give up the assumption that women are weak and stupid.

    1. Our VP proves otherwise, unfortunately.

  24. Let the limeys do their own revenge war with Russia. We've no interest. Coolroms and movies.tv aren't worth protecting. If the crown thinks otherwise they can do their own extinction event.

    We for one will not fight for this british installed junky fagot pederast president. Might send you a bag of junkies lezbians and homos to help, that's about it.

  25. Did a libertarian site just headline that it was Russia's fault someone else instituted a draft?

    1. This is not a Libertarian site.

    2. "Did a libertarian site just headline that it was Russia's fault someone else instituted a draft?"

      According the "logic" of some folks posting here, Putin's is a mere victim, responding to the US' "provocations"!

      1. Putin is clearly an aggressor - he started a war.

        What I, and others, have pointed out is that this decision was not made in isolation, and that NATO and the US fucked around for years prior.

        1. Ukraine started this war by attacking the separatists in the LDR and the DPR. They could have had a peaceful separation but they chose war.

          1. "Ukraine started this war by attacking the separatists in the LDR and the DPR. They could have had a peaceful separation but they chose war."

            A cite would be required for taht claim.

        2. "What I, and others, have pointed out is that this decision was not made in isolation, and that NATO and the US fucked around for years prior."

          What, exactly do you mean "NATO [...] fucked around"?
          And as far as the US, perhaps that was in response to:
          "Ukraine conducted its presidential election in accordance with democratic standards, reflected in the assessments of credible international observers. It did so despite clear Russian interference in Ukraine’s election, though the interference was not extensive enough to affect the election’s outcome or the actual voting process.
          While the interference did not live up to worst fears, numerous examples of it can be found in the kinetic, disinformation, and cyber realms over a period of months. Russia’s war with Ukraine and its occupation of parts of Ukraine’s territory constitute the most blatant interference, including the disenfranchisement of some 16 percent of the electorate living in Crimea and areas around Donetsk and Luhansk..."
          https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/report/foreign-interference-in-ukraine-s-election/?msclkid=f65925fbce5d11eca4df5fec4780016a
          Notice the US did not invade any country as a result.

          1. Continued encroachment towards Russia, refusal of entry into NATO, Ukraine's color revolution with Obama and VP Harris publicly encouraging Ukraine into NATO all were rather provocative acts that many experts in foreign policy counselors against, if we truly wished for peace.

            But Russia is more valuable as a bogeyman.

            1. "Continued encroachment towards Russia, refusal of entry into NATO, Ukraine's color revolution with Obama and VP Harris publicly encouraging Ukraine into NATO all were rather provocative acts that many experts in foreign policy counselors against, if we truly wished for peace."

              Try harder:
              "[E]ncroachment"?
              Did Russia own the territory?

              "Ukraine's color revolution";
              nice subject, care to tell us what the hell it means?

              "Obama and VP Harris publicly encouraging Ukraine into NATO all were rather provocative acts that many experts in foreign policy counselors against, if we truly wished for peace."
              Yep, 'public encouragement' by third parties for a sovereign nation to sign a treaty is justification for a neighboring nation to invade.
              Lame, WTH and REALLY?

              1. So, NATO encroachment has never been a big issue before? USSR never was a thing?

                PutinManBad, yes, but control your warboner before we get into nuclear WW3 for the corrupt nation our pols launder their money through.

                1. "So, NATO encroachment has never been a big issue before? USSR never was a thing?"
                  Care to (attempt) to make that a logical 'argument' rather than an appeal to emotion? The USSR collapsed 30+ years ago; are we to conduct foreign policy as if it still existed? Try logic for a change.

                  "PutinManBad, yes, but control your warboner before we get into nuclear WW3 for the corrupt nation our pols launder their money through."
                  Stuff it up your ass shitpile. Try just once to find where I lent support to *any* war.
                  OTOH, assholes like you, nardz, Misek and the rest attempting apologetics for the aggressor seem to be promoting war, no?

            2. BTW, I notice that you (among the other Putin BFFs) didn't respond to the link above. Too painful? Too honest?
              Too much evidence that you, nardz, Alan asshole, and Misek are full of shit?
              Just asking.

              1. Good stuff, Sevo

                1. TY. Tired of the whining about how 'the devil made him do it' supported by a flood of tweets.
                  Wonderful "source", no?

              2. I really didn't think you meant yourself to be taken seriously when you cited the Atlantic Council. That's kind of like sourcing a fox for henhouse security.

                1. Gee, reading the article it just too much trouble for Putin-apologist assholes.

                2. Oh, and the best source the asshole apologists have yet to produce is twitter.
                  You expect adults to pay attention to you? Fuck off.

            3. Dude, way before Victoria Nuland and the US got involved in Ukraine, the Russians actually poisoned the top pro Ukrainian presidential candidate. He survived but was disfigured. You can look that up. Don't put the blame entirely on the West.

              1. No, my whole point in this is that all parties share blame, and that should not be expunged because of other actions.

                The West's response to Putin concerns me more than Russia.

                1. "No, my whole point in this is that all parties share blame, and that should not be expunged because of other actions.
                  Boff sidz? Yeah, just like TDS-addled shitpiles justify Biden.

                  "The West's response to Putin concerns me more than Russia."
                  Shame on 'the west' calling someone who started a war "an aggressor". We should call him Numnuts BFF.

                2. One more:
                  "No, my whole point in this is that all parties share blame, and that should not be expunged because of other actions."
                  Yeah, the Ukrainian government and "the west" should be equally condemned for invading Russia, right?
                  What a fucking ignoramus.

  26. In the war that sparked all of this reassessment, it's Russia using conscripts in its invading force, while even on the defensive Ukraine has barred draft-aged men from leaving the country, but only called up reservists (and volunteers).

    Every male 60 and under who ever served in the Ukrainian military is a reservist. That's some BS propaganda to suggest the majority of Ukrainian forces aren't conscripts.

  27. Thanks to all of the famous and not so famous US Arms Manufacturers and their bought and paid for American political class.

    1. Did you know about Hitler and Nixon in Uruguay in '56!?!?!?!?

  28. There is no good reason why a draft should not apply equally to men and women.

    1. And that equality should be at zero draftees.

  29. I just hope that everything won't lead to WW3 because I have no idea what to expect from Putin, and I don't think many Russians support him. He's ruining the country, and the Russian people are suffering as well, so I don't understand why he's still convinced that it's all worth it. I'm pretty sure that once everything is over, I'll contact https://www.russia-travel.com/visa-services/ and go there, but only if Putin leaves. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one, and it's a condition for some of the Russian people to get back to this country as well.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.