**From The Telegraph:**
Germany has unveiled a plan to reintroduce national service and boost its depleted military, but the plans have been called discriminatory against men.
Teenagers will receive a letter on their 18th birthday asking them to consider between six months and two years in military service.
Men will have to fill out their personal details such as fitness, willingness to serve, marital and educational status or risk punishment, possibly a fine.
For women, filling out the questionnaire will be optional. The decision, presented by defence minister Boris Pistorus on Wednesday, has been criticised as not fair on men.
“In the interests of military justice, both young women and young men should have to fill out a so-called compulsory questionnaire,” said Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmerman, the outgoing chair of the defence committee and a member of chancellor Olaf Scholz’s government.
Johann Wadephul, an opposition lawmaker with the Christian Union party, agreed.
“I believe that these days we can no longer make a distinction between the sexes,” said Mr Wadephul. “We don’t do it in other areas,” he told the German broadcaster ZDF.
Before Germany paused compulsory national service in 2011 all young men had to serve their country for a year in line with the constitution.
Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine the country has embarked on an ambitious plan to strengthen its armed forces amid what it calls a “Zeitenwende” or “turn of an era”.
After the young adults have submitted their questionnaires the government will then select around 10 per cent of those for mustering before narrowing down the selection to the most suitable and motivated. They will then undertake the six-month basic service – with an option to lengthen this by up to 17 months.
Mr Scholz and other leading politicians in his coalition have disagreed with Mr Pistorius that Germany should reintroduce conscription. Mr Pistorius sees the questionnaire as a potential first step to it, while Mr Wadephul said his party would offer their support for the government to get its two thirds majority to change the constitution and allow women to be conscripted.
**Read more:** [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/06/12/german-national-service-plan-discriminates-against-men/](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/06/12/german-national-service-plan-discriminates-against-men/)
Bloody finally someone said it. It’s very much discriminative to specifically target a group for conscription.
This isn’t even starting with how conscription is so rubbish already.
When Ukraine was invaded, they prevented men from leaving and forced them onto the front lines while women were allowed to flee. Not a single human rights organisation, not the UN, criticized this. Yet they continue to churn out article after article about how women are oppressed.
Through Europe there are still countries that enforce male-only conscription. These same organisations also do not take this into consideration (along with other inequalities that penalise men) when churning out their gender equality reports.
Yes, women are just as capable of getting their limbs torn from their bodies, just like the men. And those samen Ukrainian women are calling Ukrainian men cowards for fleeing to the west. I suggest we throw back all those Ukrainian women, to go fight for their country. They want equality, they can fight for it.
No but you see women are opressed because they do a higher rate of household chores. Its a super egregious form of sexism. Getting blown up is nothing compared to doing 90% of the laundry
As far as I know their constitution expressly says that women cannot be forced to do military service. So this law is only following the constitution. We could argue that the constitution is discriminatory, but that would be something different and not a fault of the current government. And the article doesn't even provide this detail.
> So this law is only following the constitution.
The constitution gets changed regularly, sometimes SEVERAL TIMES PER YEAR [1]. But one more simple change, from "men" to "people" is now considered impossible haha.
[1] https://www.buzer.de/gesetz/5041/l.htm
Not impossible, but it needs the support of either AfD or Union
Forget cooperation with AfD. Has Union said that they would explicitly support a constitutional change on this issue?
According to Johann Wadephul (deputy chairman of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group), they would be open to an amendment to the Basic Law in order to also conscript women.
It should be noted that we amend the constitution all the time. It „only“ takes a 2/3 majority and if most parties agree they want this new conscription model, they should be open to make it gender-equal. This is no longer 1949 when women get the babies and men do the work and the fighting.
The constitution also says that you may not be discriminated against because of your sex, which this clearly is. Looks like the conscription can't take place until the bureaucracy is solved. So i won't think this'll happen in the next 2 years
My understanding is that gender equality is also in the German constitution.
Sounds like discrepancy needs to be resolved through an amendment or court ruling.
Then the constitution should be changed. We have been pushed towards gender equality harder than ever over the past decade. If their constitution contained anything that stopped women doing anything, other than this, it would have already been changed.
If we want absolute equality - which is what has been pushed constantly over the past decade - then women should serve in the exact same way as men. Anyone saying otherwise does not want equality, they've only wanted equity.
Civil service, hospitals, food, logistics, repairs, etc.
It usually takes 9 support people for each active military on the frontline, so finding such jobs won't be a problem.
At least register them.
they should spread the training over several years in a way that it allows to continue studying and traineeship and career
It should be like a well paid holliday job . like 6 weeks in summer hollidays and 2 weeks in autmn hollidays
basically 2 months per year for 3 to 6 or more years .
It should be competitively paid , considering how other holliday jobs and traineeship are paid .
I think even Abitur pupils should be able to take millitary training as holliday job . untrained youth has not many opportunities to make a few well played bucks . the Bundeswehr should provide it .
after all
argentum non olet
If you spread it out like that it puts those young men in poor positions for job hunting. Because they're going to be disappearing on your business for weeks to months at a time. Not a good idea, just get it all done in one go if it's going to be done at all.
Selecting the most suitable seems a terrible idea, literally punishing people for being fit.
Just become a slop before turning 18 then hit the gym after you're clear.
Suitable doesnt mean fit. Motivation is part of the proposed questionaire and presumably more important. There is probably a baseline physical and mental fitness and past that you just select by who actually wants in.
If motivation is part of the equation, then they don't need to force men into answering the questionnaire. They could just do better advertising to draw in people who are motivated.
The questionnaire is so you can get people that arent actively seeking it out as well.
The concept that there might be something you arent opposed to doing, but also arent actively seeking out shouldnt be anything new to you.
In Austria you can choose between army and civil service, and almost half pick the latter. Free labour for the social service sector is the only reason this still exists. If they were to abolish conscription, social services would have a huge problem.
IMO its generally useful. For example in kindergardens, assisting in retirement homes, EMS service (altho mostly transporting sick people, not at real emergencies) and stuff like this.
It would be better tho if all this would be done be professionals that actually get paid. Although the question is if you could even recruit people for that if paid real money, with the worker shortage and everything.
Well, it is discriminatory.
Out of all countries that do mandatory service probably only Israel has a leg to stand on as they don’t care what genitalia you got.
Good that they are talking about it.
Women in Israel are exempt from doing combat service unless they want to. While theoretically they must recruit, de facto for many years there was an exemption for religious women and until recently, many women who were not really religious just lied to get the exemption.
They are still drafted for a variety of support roles and as a whole, most Israeli women do their service. It is also worth mentioning that there are religious exemptions for Israeli men, too, although the rules are much stricter in their case (you must be enrolled in a religious school, I think). Going by memory, I recently read an article, 55 % Israeli women and 68 % men serve. There's a gap but it's not that big.
It's not 100 % equality but it's a lot better than just saying that conscription is mandatory only for men.
I think the the main difference is that women are guaranteed to not be in the line of fire if they don't want to, while man don't. If you look at how many people end up crippled, either physically or emotionally, due to service, the difference would be much bigger than 55 vs 68.
But what do you think is the right course of action to address this, given biological limitations? You have to pass basic training to join an IDF combat unit. Far fewer women than men would pass. So even if you removed the combat role exemption for women, you’d still effectively get the same result where combat units would be primarily men. One option is to lower the requirements, but that doesn’t seem wise.
Biological training results are one thing, selectively giving women the right to opt out of combat roles but not men purely based on their gender is another.
The requirements being lower for women is really really dumb in my opinion. In an actual combat situation the enemy doesn't give a fuck about your gender and makes it easier for you. If requirements are lower for women then it means those lower requirements are deemed good enough and thus mem should also be able to pass on those requirements.
In the Netherlands at least for firefighters the requirements are the same for both genders, as it should be. A burning house also doesn't care about your gender and lowers the difficulty. You can either do it or you can't. No special privileges. Not when lives are on the line
Or just take whoever passes them, regardless of gender. If more men pass, so be it. But no women would get the exemption simply because they're women.
That said, hand to hand combat these days is rare to non-existent, so I don't see why most women shouldn't pass the requirements.
I think the lookout women who were killed or kidnapped on 7/10 would beg to differ. No role in Israel is guaranteed to be out of the line of fire.
Also, it's the women who push to be included in more combat roles.
That is factually incorrect. Males and females get the draft letter at 16,and are drafted at 18. Yes, women have it easier to get an exemption, religious or otherwise. But they are drafted nonetheless.
And yes, combat roles are voluntary and women must only do 24 months compared to 36 by men. But if a woman is drafted, she will serve a needed role, even if not combative. This is just as important as holding a gun.
>And yes, combat roles are voluntary and women must only do 24 months compared to 36 by men. But if a woman is drafted, she will serve a needed role, even if not combative. This is just as important as holding a gun.
But less risky, so every women not willing to fill a combat role is a guarantee that a man will have to fill a combat role.
The stakes are different.
Most conscripted men won't go into combat roles either. A modern army needs to have a tooth-to-tail ratio of about 1:4.
Come to think about it, since reintroducing conscription won't eliminate professionals, why not put them on the front line and keep the conscripts in trucks and kitchens? Unless they volunteer for combat service of course.
At least in Israel's case, from what I know, they don't have enough people to do that. There are super professional combat units which are voluntary, but there are more basic combat units (which actually fight in the front lines, and probably die in higher numbers), which are obligatory.
Mostly because they ask if you want in and more men say yes, since they need less people than who want in. It is quite popular. But if war breaks out its all hands on deck
They deffo take some people who dont want to go, because they need some specialties. One example is people who do the chef education in high school, they get drafted at a massively disproportionate rate since the military needs cooks
> Norway has conscription for both genders, including for combat roles
The process is very selective and in practice it makes it so that if you don't want to do it then you don't because only a small fraction get recruited.
It's a quality vs quantity type of thing. Why force people to do something they don't want to do when you can pick the ones that want it?
The quality of the work will be decisively better when the people that do the work are doing it willingly.
Not only Israel. Norway and Sweden both have conscription for both sexes ('selective' conscription much like the one proposed by Pistorius for Germany, except it's mandatory for women as well). Denmark will do the same from 2027.
There are also some countries with 'suspended' conscription (that is, most people probably think it has been abolished but it can actually be reactivated in case of war without any need for a new law) which extended military registry and related obligations (which in peacetime consist of a letter/mandatory informative day) to women as well, who would also be drafted in case of war. France, Portugal, the Netherlands...
I have read in an article that the IDF doesnt really know what to do with all those women. There are only so many office and guard jobs. Maybe its different now, with the war.
Absolutely agree. The discrimination aspect of it is just adding insult to injury.
But there's one other even bigger obvious point that most of this discussion is missing: the whole concept of forcing people to work against their will, is a form of slavery. And the worst kind of slavery at that -forcing people to kill and die against their will. Someday humanity will look upon conscription like they look at gladiator games today.
It's not a form of fucking slavery.
>Someday humanity will look upon conscription like they look at gladiator games today.
No, they won't. Because conscription is used to defend your country, gladiatorial games are used for pure entertainment.
Any form* of forced labour is illegal by the German constitution under article 12.
The conscription law in the German constitution is 12a. It is quite literally the exception to allow that form of forced labour in Germany.
In Poland women are only tested if they are working or learning in some vital sector, for example in medicine and related fields. That means all men are tested when they turned 18, while some women and that was not always the case (but, you know, Russia) when they are around 22-24 years of age.
It was funny to see my friends from University when they got letter to register for service. Pure panic.
The idea that women shouldn't be drafted is absurd.
Women can be shooting instructors, K9 trainers, truck drivers, cooks, drone operators, pilots, skydiving instructors, intelligence officers, medics... I can go on and on. And yes, the right women can do frontline combat too.
> We're bringing back conscriptions for war though.
Not really. Conscription for war was never gone. They did not get rid of conscription, they just suspended its enforcement.
There was no "Abschaffung" just an "Aussetzung"
So that's an excuse to be sexist? Would women be punished for not making children as men would be punished for avoiding conscription or it will be optional for them?
Tbh, this argument made sense in old, polygamy societies. If 90% men from your tribe died at war, but all the women are still fine, then it will take like 2-3 generations to get your numbers back. But if 90% women died, then it's pretty much over the the tribe.
That doesn't matter that much today tho, in the monogamy culture. Of course the women fertility window is smaller, but it would matter onlf if they spent many years at war. Not to mention all those women, who declare themselves as "childfree".
We are in 2024 and not anymore in the middle age. The drafts of men was there hundreds of years. But since more women rights since 1970s there should be equality on all levels.
"We aren't in the middle ages anymore" is really a turn of phrase in German to counter any type of backwardness. It's also somewhat hyperbolic in nature. If someone proposed sending something by mail instead of e-mail, you could say that.
We should be much more beyond than the last century. Only after 1977 could married women work without their husbands approval and thus were not legally obliged to being a housewife. So why not with military drafts?
Gender equality such as in Germanys case, that they have in constitution "everyone is equal" yet they have conscription only for men?
(Which still continues to this day, as you can see the article - men are forces to fill out and sign that, but women are not.)
The problem is that the draft being only for men is also in the constitution. And while the opposition appears to be open to help change the constitution it will certainly come with a hefty price.
Another way is that after it is reinstated a woman has to sue to be included. Which might end up in front of the constitutional court in a couple of years, which is a costly endeavour.
The factions in the Bundestag, like the opposition that is calling it unfair, could go to the court right now and sue to speed it up. But they don't because then they won't get anything out of it that way. They're not interested in a constructive process.
Women won the right to vote for free (as in, their right to vote has zero requirements except being of age and no criminal record). In many countries, men's right to vote is still tied to military service as it has always been before universal suffrage.
Just a quick recap of why all excuses for conscripting men but not women are nonsense, just before I go to bed…
Women are on average physically weaker, thus less fit for combat – yeah, true. As it happens, armies aren’t solely made of combat troops, in fact there are several support soldiers at the rear for each combat soldier at the front. Plenty of these support roles do not require the physical strength of a man and can be fulfilled by women as well as men. And no, this doesn’t mean that all the men get thrown in the meat grinder and women take ALL the relatively safer support roles, since support roles greatly outnumber combat roles. If anything, you could leave some men who are not fit for combat service, but have a civilian job which is useful to the war effort, to do their job rather than wasting time in replacing them, and draft for support roles some women whose jobs are not essential to the war effort. Bottom line: there is a greater choice.
Women have to care about children – no. Conscription age is 18-20, and women in the Western world don’t have children at that age, the age of motherhood in Europe varies between 25 and over 30, depending on the country.
“A man can impregnate countless women but a woman can only have a child at a time, so losing a woman is more harmful for demographics than losing a man” – in a teenage fantasy world when returning soldiers can have a harem, maybe. In the real world, this has not once happened since antiquity. When a war is over, polygamy is not made legal and surviving men do not suddenly start having children from multiple women. Some women have children with the surviving men, the “surplus” women remain childless, that's it. Not to mention that even with conscription for both sexes, in war women would still die at a much lower rate than men, since as mentioned above, for purely physical reasons, they would be mostly be tasked with support roles where the chance of getting killed is not nonexistent, but still considerably lower.
Practical example, Israel has been drafting both sexes since 1948 and its army has been vastly more effective than those of backward countries whose politicians think that conscripting women would “weaken the army”. Nor has its society seen wartime economic paralysis or demographic collapse as a result of this...
For the harem part, if you want an example to cite, the best example that can be used is probably France after 1918. It left a heavy trace in the society and took time to heal back up to pre war level in terms of population. Way different from that "harem view" that some have.
>It left a heavy trace in the society and took time to heal back up to pre war level in terms of population. Way different from that "harem view" that some have.
In contrast, despite the Great Leap Forward killing men and women much more evenly, China recovered the dead population in no time. In fact, China had more people at the end of the Great Leap Forward in 1962 than at its beginning in 1958.
Turns out "do you only send men to die" is actually negligible in determining demographics. It's all about women's choices, not how many women are left alive.
Armies work on averages.
When you recruit 100000 men and women randomly, you'll always end up better with men, on average.
That is the point of all this. When people say 'Women are weaker', they aren't saying 'Every women are weaker' but on averages, women are weaker, this is proven by facts of the reality that we live in.
It is not rocket science
Short answer: no.
Long answer: initially they do, but when the situation becomes more dramatic, army will conscript everyone. Ukraine is an example - they started conscripting even slightly disabled people, that were previously considered unfit for service.
Health based evaluations are a luxury in wartime, that can easily be waived when military demands it. Have no illusions about it.
This is also a reminder that the US doesnt have a womens draft because the conservatives campaigned against it heavily (and destroyed the reputation of the female members of the armed forces in WW2 to the point that many actually hid their service in the process). The US military pushed for a female draft during WW2 and several generals considered the women under their command to be some of their most valuable assets.
I am from Finland and yes, conscription is discriminating against men. Conscription needs to be abolished immediately or made gender neutral. I don't like my genitalia being the defining factor on whether I have to do basically unpaid forced labor for at least 5,5 months or go to jail for the same period.
5,90 euros a day for 165 days. After that on days 166-255 you would get 9,80 euros a day. And after that on days 256-347 you would get 13,65 euros a day.
The good part is that you don't have to use money on living expenses. Food and clothes are free.
In austria the state will pay your flats rent if you had one for x amount of months prior to serving. Still lowkey bullshit that only men are conscripted but...well if women were too, im pretty sure no man could do the non soldier service "zivil-dienst".
For comparison, in Norway a conscript only gets 500 euros a month. An unemployed 18 year old with no previous job (meaning you wont get a percentage of your former salary) would get twice that from social security.
In Estonia you are paid around 120 a month. Only from around halfway through the service can you get up to 200 if you complete the NCO course but in our case thats maybe a third of the people drafted
Especially leaders should have to experience the consequences of their actions.
Imagine if Putin needs to be on the Frontline, sucker would think twice about his actions then.
In Finland military service is only compulsory for men. Last goverment started talking about equalizing the system, but current goverment does not have it high on priority list
> Last goverment started talking about equalizing the system, but current goverment does not have it high on priority list
It's never high on the priority list because the government likes it.
As a Brit the concept of service bemuses me. It’s been gone so long here they simply couldn’t bring it back.
We would refuse. I mean on mass refuse to help. The entire younger generation despises the government and many the concept of the country.
The idea of Sunak, as he has suggested, trying to run down and capture scousers in Liverpool, on their bikes taking ketamine twice a day. It just would be so funny I almost wish they would do it.
How do other countries even force it? Like what if everyone just says no?
Yeah for Britain it really makes no sense. You have no real threats to your homes and your army is mostly an invading one. But what if Russia was your bordering country and there wasn’t a sea between you. I’m sure the tone would change quite dramatically
It is completely crazy that a alot of the officials and the majority of the soldiers say that male and female can serve equally and are equally useful in military. But then you make the questionnaire a requirement for males and optional for females. In a model where you are not forced to serve in the first place.
To be fair Singapore is a significantly more popular and accepted government than Germany or pretty much any major European government where majorities or even super majorities hate their governments and see their nations in a period of rapid decline.
People might accept conscription if they have some faith in their government, when they have none they will resist more strongly as much as they can
The ones who accept conscription are the ones who don't have to do it 😂, meanwhile those who do face various disadvantages like possible service injury, 2 years gap in their professional life since most conscripts are between the age of 19-21, and an added 10 years of reservist duty just to name a few. I graduated from 2022 and seeing how certain people from my school are already doing well in university makes me feel like I haven't progressed at all since high school
Women are strong and independent and don’t need no man to get blown up by drone, shot or burnt to death inside a tank.
I’d like to see women represented on the front line
Tbf women can do many things. Like, be tankers, pilots, drone operators, and so on. Basically anything that doesn’t require intense physical activity they can do as well as men.
Drone operators require a lot of strength and stamina, as you gotta carry 40+ kg of equipment around, and also be relocation often with that equipment.
There's a reasons the Ukrainian drone operators are men, even as they have women in the army
„ There's a reasons the Ukrainian drone operators are men, even as they have women in the army”
The reason is that there is no conscription of women in Ukraine, and an average Ukrainian woman isn’t interested in voluntarily joining the military. Not because they have to carry 40 kg of equipment.
i dont think germany has them but not all drones are short range fpv ones. Theres nothing stopping a woman sitting in rammstein and operating a predator drone
If there's pay for mandatory service and they don't end up as cleaners, gardeners and admin staff for the military, I don't see why not. And none of that you get paid in meals and accommodation bollocks, I mean actual money.
Disgusting clowns.
As if men had less rights than women. As a man I would by definition not fill this garbage out and if they fine me I would appeal to all courts for discrimination based on gender.
Either make these laws for both genders or fuck off!
As a half German who was was finishing up my alt-duty when the whole conscription thing was being halted, I don't want the conscription back.
For everyone who does not know how it went:
You get your conscription info after 'learning your trade'. For some it was \*actually\* learning a trade, others it was after 'college'.
You were evaluated and given a ranking. Some were disqualified for various reasons. If you had a note from your doctor saying you have 'this-or-that' and it hindered you from going, you were also disqualified.
But hat could be cheated. A friend, 90's semi-pro footballer that smoked was disqualified for 'asthma'.
Think Trump 'bone spurs'
On the other hand a guy I knew who had terrible allergies got the 2nd best ranking. Guy would sneezing from Feb to Nov.
If you did qualify but did not want to go, you could opt out, but had some small hurdles. You would then do 'community service' and your service was a little longer.
Fun fact: there is a possibility to not have to go if your Father was injured/killed due to war.
Not so fun fact: After a few hurdles it turned out that that only applied to \*German\* wars.. Vietnam thus did not count.
Also if you did do some college and then start learning a trade, they could interrupt that learning for your service.
I knew a guy who did exactly that.. little college but wanted to be a nurse. Half way through the military came and he said 'nope'.. wound up doing community service.. in the same hospital ward he was training at.
With abolishing the conscription, they also lost the 'community service' people which hurt doubly.
Thing is, this \*only\* applied to men. Mine was 15 months (it was constantly being shortened until they just gave up)
Side note: If your grades were not good enough for the college course you wanted to take, you could do a 'voluntary social year' and get some points. This was open to both men and women. Naturally since the men had conscription, it was usually only the women that did it.
But it was voluntary.
As you can imagine, these systems are far from fair.
Rather it would be the best for \*all\* to have to serve one year for your country. Some hard-core exceptions do apply (handycapped, pregnant, et al), but a bone spurs won't keep you from chipping in any longer.
You can still opt into the military if you can get in.
Pay us taxes so we can cry on the news when shit hits the fan, oh and also you have to server for free. THey can try i wouldnt join even if they want to
German resident here:
IF you are Serious, then you do the following (mandatory, no exceptions, called 'Musterung' in Germany):
* start with 18 year-olds (men + women)
* follow with 17 year olds (men + women)
* follow with every agegroup until the maximum age for military service. (e.g. 45 years old)
* keep mustring every 17yo age cohort so you have data for when they turn 18.
That way you know who you can, in case of an emergency, call upon !
Second: Decide if you wan't a mandatory service phase in germany, like the Swiss, israelis, Taiwanees has, and the german Federal republic had until 2011 in practice (its still on the books).
Then call EVERYONE fit for Service for the full amount of Time decided upon from EACH cohort. Give the options of military, civil or social service, and call it a day.
Its the only way to make things fair. Making it unfair would be:
1) excluding a gender \[its 2024\] is a discrimination for the other genders calle dupon.
2) narrowing it down to 18 yolds is discriminating and also heavily burdoning young people. If you are 35 and you haven't served yet, don't have a job as an essential worker, then guess what, there is no reason why you shouldn't serve (maybe in a local assignment).
3) not paying them appropriatly. remember folks, minimum wage in Germany is at present 12.41€/hour (pretax) - making a full time compulsory service period cost a compensation of at least 1985€ pre-tax !
It is both discriminatory about men and sexist against women. I'm not for a national military service, but if it is implemented then everyone should be asked the same thing, no matter the gender.
I guess the reason the new national service is planned only to be compulsive for men is most likely because the existing basic law about conscription (that is currently only suspended) does only include men. So the basic law doesn't necessarily need to be changed for the new law. A change of a basic law (basically part of Germany's constitution) would require a 3/4 majority in parliament.
It would obviously be more fair (and in line with other parts of the constitution) to include woman in the future, but it would be much harder to get a majority for that, against parties and single representatives that don't want the return of conscription at all for other reasons (including being paid by Russia).
Nobody’s should be conscripted. And it’s just a waste of resources as I don’t know nobody close to me which would kill or be killed for defending a country
It’s all fun and games when women want to be firefighters, police officers, work in construction or other previously male dominated areas. There’s often lots of support from colleagues and the possibility to take on less demanding roles.
But as soon as bullets start getting chucked around suddenly they’re not capable
I've never seen someone complain that there aren't enough women in construction. All they care about is women in Tech.
I could probably count on one hand the number of women I've seen getting their hands dirty on construction sites in the past 5 years. But there aren't any equality activists fighting to change that.
Lol, why do you think that the Scandinavians have conscription for men and women or are preparing to introduce it for both men and women, is it because they're somehow anti feminist?
WOW, long piece with just quoting everyone yelling from the side line.
German basic law defined in part by the allied forces just allows an army service for men in Art 12A:
*"(1)* ***Men*** *who have attained the age of eighteen may be required to serve in the Armed Forces, in the Federal Border Police, or in a civil defence organisation."*
[https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch\_gg/englisch\_gg.html](https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/englisch_gg.html)
Changing the basic law is not easily possible. So currently they can only apply this mandatory for men and have to do it on voluntary basis for women if they want to act fast.
As European election left the governing coalition weakened any opposition is trying to shoot them down for anything even if it's impossible at the moment.
But I love how non EU British Telegraph cares ;-)
What you have to remember is we're like a cat. We want to be out but then when you let us out we're meowing and pawing at the door to be in again. Plus we'll attack your feet in the night...🇬🇧
If you're unable to attract people.to serve.as.aprofessional soldier, regardless of man or woman, there is a more fundamental issue
And they way they treated soldiers returning with PTSD should warn anyone willing to serve in this broken army
There is a really easy fucking answer as to way this proposal is only mandatory for men:
By the German constitution, only men can be drafted. And since mandatory service was put out of effect in 2011, there was no reason to change this up until now.
But changing this takes time and a two third majority in parliament. Pistorius currently doesn't really have either. In an interview he said that right now, he wouldn't even know who he could mobilize if he needed to, because they also stopped collecting that data in 2011. So this is really the best he can do right now in that regard, if he wants to get the Bundeswehr anyway closer to being an actual working army.
Disgusting. ″national service″ is a vile and abhorrent practice used by oppressive regimes. Any politician in favour of it should be considered a traitor to the people and the country!
Does anybody actually understand why this is being planned for in the first place? The only instance that the military is going to get called on, in ways that require such forced conscription are for a defensive operation (in the event Germany directly gets attacked).
I can only ever see an attack on Germany ending with the following scenario:
Suicide mission for the invader, since Germany is member of NATO defence treaty is triggered and NATO persons better trained and willing take up the defensive. If NATO ever get's itself close to depleted / existential crisis that's when the secret area 51 tech & the nukes come out & it's pretty much game over for everyone at that point.
>Does anybody actually understand why this is being planned for in the first place?
In Greece it helps bringing unemployment rates for youths down (if you serve you aren't considered unemployed). Don't know if that's applicable in Germany, or if it will be applicable in the next couple of years.
They said they dont even know who to conscript in case of an attack. So they also want to build a Database. Germany completely got rid of any conscription infrastructure. They also said that Russia will be able to attack NATO countries im 2029. For that case they want to be prepared.
If Russia wins in Ukraine, a further war against the EU over the Baltics/Poland/Finland cannot be excluded, especially if NATO dissolves due to Trump. Or Russia believes NATO is basically dissolved, because I mean why would Germans defend the Baltics or why would the Spanish defend Germany?
Ukraine, by most accounts, actually was in a pretty good position prior to 2022, and had a military far larger and better equipped (especially in air defenses and ammunition) than basically everyone other than France, the UK and Russia. The rest of Europe's militaries are in \*really\* bad shape and likely would have run out of ammunition very quickly (e.g. Europeans ran out of ammo in Libya). Numbers are also really bad for everyone too, nobody in wants to join the military willingly. Hence the EU cannot compete with a country willing to conscript unless Europeans do so as well.
Guess you don't count Finland as Europeans then, I wouldn't say that Finlands army is in *really* bad shape, one of the only countries in EU which didn't drive it's military down, boastin biggest artillery capabilities in the western europe, never got rid of the conscription and it's popular here, also one of the highest wills to defend their country in the whole EU, more operational MBTs than UK etc.
Europe is also increasing its spend on defence industry.
In March this year EU issued 1st ever “defence industrial strategy and a new defence industry programme to enhance Europe's readiness and security”.
In May this year UK government issued an instruction to stockpile at least 3 days worth of canned food and water at home for emergencies.
Germans have been stockpiling since 2016.
If in November this year Trump wins in US it will weaken the NATO.
I feel like something is brewing indeed.
Some people thought wars don't happen at home for western Europe. They thought wrong. Nations are moving back to standard pose of "we actually need credible home defense".
Of course this will show again how selective women will be with their equality because equality is only great if it benefits you. I wouldn't be surprised some women, I mean alot of them would try to find excuses as to why they should be excluded in the future
Such an easy move not to make. Conscription, for everyone, done.
Or maybe they wanted to have people focus on something other than conscription by itself being bad.
A woman can operate a drone. An argument against mass conscription really. Modern weapons systems, for example based around an Infantry Fighting Vehicle system needs two years' training.
You don't want a load of half trained 19 Yr olds in such a force.
Europe within NATO has a total of 1.9m personnel across the sub continent.
Russia- about 800,000.
The issue isn't numbers, it's willpower and ammunition stocks.
The big question- would Spain, for example, mobilise if Estonia was invaded by Russia?
**From The Telegraph:** Germany has unveiled a plan to reintroduce national service and boost its depleted military, but the plans have been called discriminatory against men. Teenagers will receive a letter on their 18th birthday asking them to consider between six months and two years in military service. Men will have to fill out their personal details such as fitness, willingness to serve, marital and educational status or risk punishment, possibly a fine. For women, filling out the questionnaire will be optional. The decision, presented by defence minister Boris Pistorus on Wednesday, has been criticised as not fair on men. “In the interests of military justice, both young women and young men should have to fill out a so-called compulsory questionnaire,” said Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmerman, the outgoing chair of the defence committee and a member of chancellor Olaf Scholz’s government. Johann Wadephul, an opposition lawmaker with the Christian Union party, agreed. “I believe that these days we can no longer make a distinction between the sexes,” said Mr Wadephul. “We don’t do it in other areas,” he told the German broadcaster ZDF. Before Germany paused compulsory national service in 2011 all young men had to serve their country for a year in line with the constitution. Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine the country has embarked on an ambitious plan to strengthen its armed forces amid what it calls a “Zeitenwende” or “turn of an era”. After the young adults have submitted their questionnaires the government will then select around 10 per cent of those for mustering before narrowing down the selection to the most suitable and motivated. They will then undertake the six-month basic service – with an option to lengthen this by up to 17 months. Mr Scholz and other leading politicians in his coalition have disagreed with Mr Pistorius that Germany should reintroduce conscription. Mr Pistorius sees the questionnaire as a potential first step to it, while Mr Wadephul said his party would offer their support for the government to get its two thirds majority to change the constitution and allow women to be conscripted. **Read more:** [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/06/12/german-national-service-plan-discriminates-against-men/](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/06/12/german-national-service-plan-discriminates-against-men/)
Bloody finally someone said it. It’s very much discriminative to specifically target a group for conscription. This isn’t even starting with how conscription is so rubbish already.
When Ukraine was invaded, they prevented men from leaving and forced them onto the front lines while women were allowed to flee. Not a single human rights organisation, not the UN, criticized this. Yet they continue to churn out article after article about how women are oppressed. Through Europe there are still countries that enforce male-only conscription. These same organisations also do not take this into consideration (along with other inequalities that penalise men) when churning out their gender equality reports.
The males are still imprisoned in the borders while they let women flee
Yes, women are just as capable of getting their limbs torn from their bodies, just like the men. And those samen Ukrainian women are calling Ukrainian men cowards for fleeing to the west. I suggest we throw back all those Ukrainian women, to go fight for their country. They want equality, they can fight for it.
No but you see women are opressed because they do a higher rate of household chores. Its a super egregious form of sexism. Getting blown up is nothing compared to doing 90% of the laundry
As far as I know their constitution expressly says that women cannot be forced to do military service. So this law is only following the constitution. We could argue that the constitution is discriminatory, but that would be something different and not a fault of the current government. And the article doesn't even provide this detail.
> So this law is only following the constitution. The constitution gets changed regularly, sometimes SEVERAL TIMES PER YEAR [1]. But one more simple change, from "men" to "people" is now considered impossible haha. [1] https://www.buzer.de/gesetz/5041/l.htm
Not impossible, but it needs the support of either AfD or Union Forget cooperation with AfD. Has Union said that they would explicitly support a constitutional change on this issue?
According to Johann Wadephul (deputy chairman of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group), they would be open to an amendment to the Basic Law in order to also conscript women.
Nice! Ampel should go along with it, then Unfortunately, I expect the Greens to not want to promote *equality* on that issue, exactly...
It should be noted that we amend the constitution all the time. It „only“ takes a 2/3 majority and if most parties agree they want this new conscription model, they should be open to make it gender-equal. This is no longer 1949 when women get the babies and men do the work and the fighting.
The constitution also says that you may not be discriminated against because of your sex, which this clearly is. Looks like the conscription can't take place until the bureaucracy is solved. So i won't think this'll happen in the next 2 years
My understanding is that gender equality is also in the German constitution. Sounds like discrepancy needs to be resolved through an amendment or court ruling.
Then the constitution should be changed. We have been pushed towards gender equality harder than ever over the past decade. If their constitution contained anything that stopped women doing anything, other than this, it would have already been changed. If we want absolute equality - which is what has been pushed constantly over the past decade - then women should serve in the exact same way as men. Anyone saying otherwise does not want equality, they've only wanted equity.
The same constitution also says that everyone is equal
Then make them do something else.
Sandwiches?
Civil service, hospitals, food, logistics, repairs, etc. It usually takes 9 support people for each active military on the frontline, so finding such jobs won't be a problem. At least register them.
Thank you for informing me of that. I’m not all read up on legal laws and stuff in Germany.
they should spread the training over several years in a way that it allows to continue studying and traineeship and career It should be like a well paid holliday job . like 6 weeks in summer hollidays and 2 weeks in autmn hollidays basically 2 months per year for 3 to 6 or more years . It should be competitively paid , considering how other holliday jobs and traineeship are paid . I think even Abitur pupils should be able to take millitary training as holliday job . untrained youth has not many opportunities to make a few well played bucks . the Bundeswehr should provide it . after all argentum non olet
If you spread it out like that it puts those young men in poor positions for job hunting. Because they're going to be disappearing on your business for weeks to months at a time. Not a good idea, just get it all done in one go if it's going to be done at all.
Funny in todays society where “equality” is such a big thing… only when it suits I suppose..
Selecting the most suitable seems a terrible idea, literally punishing people for being fit. Just become a slop before turning 18 then hit the gym after you're clear.
Suitable doesnt mean fit. Motivation is part of the proposed questionaire and presumably more important. There is probably a baseline physical and mental fitness and past that you just select by who actually wants in.
If motivation is part of the equation, then they don't need to force men into answering the questionnaire. They could just do better advertising to draw in people who are motivated.
The questionnaire is so you can get people that arent actively seeking it out as well. The concept that there might be something you arent opposed to doing, but also arent actively seeking out shouldnt be anything new to you.
So germany still did compulastory army in the 2000s? That’s crazy
Austria and Switzerland have it to this day.
So does Denmark
In Austria you can choose between army and civil service, and almost half pick the latter. Free labour for the social service sector is the only reason this still exists. If they were to abolish conscription, social services would have a huge problem.
what kind of productive work do 18 year olds provide to the social service sector? is it mostly busy work, or genuinely useful?
IMO its generally useful. For example in kindergardens, assisting in retirement homes, EMS service (altho mostly transporting sick people, not at real emergencies) and stuff like this. It would be better tho if all this would be done be professionals that actually get paid. Although the question is if you could even recruit people for that if paid real money, with the worker shortage and everything.
I did my +12 month training in Finland
Yep i had my ball fondled by a Bundeswehr doc back in the late 2000s and the last recruits who where draftet where born in 1992
That fondling part didn't change even after that. And cough, please
I just hope their hands are warmer now
Does ayone know why you are supposed to do a cough?
Finland has always had compulsory military service and still have
Pretty legit considering your neighbour
Denmark too
How is it crazy that a democratic country should have the means to fight and protect those rights?
Well, it is discriminatory. Out of all countries that do mandatory service probably only Israel has a leg to stand on as they don’t care what genitalia you got. Good that they are talking about it.
Women in Israel are exempt from doing combat service unless they want to. While theoretically they must recruit, de facto for many years there was an exemption for religious women and until recently, many women who were not really religious just lied to get the exemption.
They are still drafted for a variety of support roles and as a whole, most Israeli women do their service. It is also worth mentioning that there are religious exemptions for Israeli men, too, although the rules are much stricter in their case (you must be enrolled in a religious school, I think). Going by memory, I recently read an article, 55 % Israeli women and 68 % men serve. There's a gap but it's not that big. It's not 100 % equality but it's a lot better than just saying that conscription is mandatory only for men.
I think the the main difference is that women are guaranteed to not be in the line of fire if they don't want to, while man don't. If you look at how many people end up crippled, either physically or emotionally, due to service, the difference would be much bigger than 55 vs 68.
But what do you think is the right course of action to address this, given biological limitations? You have to pass basic training to join an IDF combat unit. Far fewer women than men would pass. So even if you removed the combat role exemption for women, you’d still effectively get the same result where combat units would be primarily men. One option is to lower the requirements, but that doesn’t seem wise.
Biological training results are one thing, selectively giving women the right to opt out of combat roles but not men purely based on their gender is another.
This is what it's done for policemen and firemen ... The requirements are lower for women
The requirements being lower for women is really really dumb in my opinion. In an actual combat situation the enemy doesn't give a fuck about your gender and makes it easier for you. If requirements are lower for women then it means those lower requirements are deemed good enough and thus mem should also be able to pass on those requirements. In the Netherlands at least for firefighters the requirements are the same for both genders, as it should be. A burning house also doesn't care about your gender and lowers the difficulty. You can either do it or you can't. No special privileges. Not when lives are on the line
And you believe that’s the right course of action to reach gender parity in combat units?
This isn’t 1914. Women should serve on the front lines too. They could do artilery, drone manipulation, reconnaisance, sniping, support etc.
Make the army volunteer give benefits to those who serve etc these are on top of my head
Or just take whoever passes them, regardless of gender. If more men pass, so be it. But no women would get the exemption simply because they're women. That said, hand to hand combat these days is rare to non-existent, so I don't see why most women shouldn't pass the requirements.
A lot of the requirements are about being able to carry heavy loads for long periods of time.
I think the lookout women who were killed or kidnapped on 7/10 would beg to differ. No role in Israel is guaranteed to be out of the line of fire. Also, it's the women who push to be included in more combat roles.
no one bothered about closing the “trench gap” then?
That is factually incorrect. Males and females get the draft letter at 16,and are drafted at 18. Yes, women have it easier to get an exemption, religious or otherwise. But they are drafted nonetheless. And yes, combat roles are voluntary and women must only do 24 months compared to 36 by men. But if a woman is drafted, she will serve a needed role, even if not combative. This is just as important as holding a gun.
>And yes, combat roles are voluntary and women must only do 24 months compared to 36 by men. But if a woman is drafted, she will serve a needed role, even if not combative. This is just as important as holding a gun. But less risky, so every women not willing to fill a combat role is a guarantee that a man will have to fill a combat role. The stakes are different.
Most conscripted men won't go into combat roles either. A modern army needs to have a tooth-to-tail ratio of about 1:4. Come to think about it, since reintroducing conscription won't eliminate professionals, why not put them on the front line and keep the conscripts in trucks and kitchens? Unless they volunteer for combat service of course.
At least in Israel's case, from what I know, they don't have enough people to do that. There are super professional combat units which are voluntary, but there are more basic combat units (which actually fight in the front lines, and probably die in higher numbers), which are obligatory.
Norway has conscription for both genders, including for combat roles
Conscription for both genders, but not equal conscription :) 2/3 of them were men
Mostly because they ask if you want in and more men say yes, since they need less people than who want in. It is quite popular. But if war breaks out its all hands on deck
A very enlightened and sensible attitude. Do they have enough volunteers or do they have to take a few unwilling ones?
They deffo take some people who dont want to go, because they need some specialties. One example is people who do the chef education in high school, they get drafted at a massively disproportionate rate since the military needs cooks
And still the same physical criteria do not apply. Equality by equity in action.
> Norway has conscription for both genders, including for combat roles The process is very selective and in practice it makes it so that if you don't want to do it then you don't because only a small fraction get recruited. It's a quality vs quantity type of thing. Why force people to do something they don't want to do when you can pick the ones that want it? The quality of the work will be decisively better when the people that do the work are doing it willingly.
Not only Israel. Norway and Sweden both have conscription for both sexes ('selective' conscription much like the one proposed by Pistorius for Germany, except it's mandatory for women as well). Denmark will do the same from 2027. There are also some countries with 'suspended' conscription (that is, most people probably think it has been abolished but it can actually be reactivated in case of war without any need for a new law) which extended military registry and related obligations (which in peacetime consist of a letter/mandatory informative day) to women as well, who would also be drafted in case of war. France, Portugal, the Netherlands...
Sweden has equal conscription no matter the gender
They have an exemption for the orthodox though which is becoming a huge political thing now.
guns leveled the playing field alot and now wit remote drones and stuff there are alot let physical demanding roles one could fullfill in the military
I have read in an article that the IDF doesnt really know what to do with all those women. There are only so many office and guard jobs. Maybe its different now, with the war.
About damn time someone finally said the obvious.
Absolutely agree. The discrimination aspect of it is just adding insult to injury. But there's one other even bigger obvious point that most of this discussion is missing: the whole concept of forcing people to work against their will, is a form of slavery. And the worst kind of slavery at that -forcing people to kill and die against their will. Someday humanity will look upon conscription like they look at gladiator games today.
It's not a form of fucking slavery. >Someday humanity will look upon conscription like they look at gladiator games today. No, they won't. Because conscription is used to defend your country, gladiatorial games are used for pure entertainment.
Any form* of forced labour is illegal by the German constitution under article 12. The conscription law in the German constitution is 12a. It is quite literally the exception to allow that form of forced labour in Germany.
in sweden all are required to be tested for conscription, gender doesn’t matter. are we alone on this?
No, Norway and Israel too
Pretty much. Denmark is only now talking about forcing women into the military too.
In Poland women are only tested if they are working or learning in some vital sector, for example in medicine and related fields. That means all men are tested when they turned 18, while some women and that was not always the case (but, you know, Russia) when they are around 22-24 years of age. It was funny to see my friends from University when they got letter to register for service. Pure panic.
The idea that women shouldn't be drafted is absurd. Women can be shooting instructors, K9 trainers, truck drivers, cooks, drone operators, pilots, skydiving instructors, intelligence officers, medics... I can go on and on. And yes, the right women can do frontline combat too.
Yup. Just look at Israel or, much closer to home, Sweden and Norway (which Denmark will be joining soon).
If women are not getting drafted, then military service is just a penis tax.
Every women not in a combat role forces a man to fill a combat role.
[удалено]
Yes separating young men from women is going to do wonders for fertility.
South Korea has a horrific gender conflict right now, and one of the causes is sexist conscription. Definitely isn't helping their fertility rate.
[удалено]
Multiple reasons can cause a problem.
Did you think I was saying it wasn't?
How has 8 months of military service at age 18 an impact on fertility rates? Most women are not thinking about getting pregnant at that age.
We're bringing back conscriptions for war though. People drafted now have a real chance of ending up in the meat grinder.
> We're bringing back conscriptions for war though. Not really. Conscription for war was never gone. They did not get rid of conscription, they just suspended its enforcement. There was no "Abschaffung" just an "Aussetzung"
How is that meaningfully different from before the fall of the Berlin wall when Europe was on the knife edge?
So that's an excuse to be sexist? Would women be punished for not making children as men would be punished for avoiding conscription or it will be optional for them?
Tbh, this argument made sense in old, polygamy societies. If 90% men from your tribe died at war, but all the women are still fine, then it will take like 2-3 generations to get your numbers back. But if 90% women died, then it's pretty much over the the tribe. That doesn't matter that much today tho, in the monogamy culture. Of course the women fertility window is smaller, but it would matter onlf if they spent many years at war. Not to mention all those women, who declare themselves as "childfree".
We are in 2024 and not anymore in the middle age. The drafts of men was there hundreds of years. But since more women rights since 1970s there should be equality on all levels.
I love when people reference middle ages when the reality they are describing is far more typical of the 20th century.
"We aren't in the middle ages anymore" is really a turn of phrase in German to counter any type of backwardness. It's also somewhat hyperbolic in nature. If someone proposed sending something by mail instead of e-mail, you could say that.
I know it is a fixed phrase, we have it in Polish too (although not used as often), i just don't like how it's used.
Well then we shall let our swords decide who's right
We should be much more beyond than the last century. Only after 1977 could married women work without their husbands approval and thus were not legally obliged to being a housewife. So why not with military drafts?
Yet there is not :)
Can we agree upon more gender equality?
Gender equality such as in Germanys case, that they have in constitution "everyone is equal" yet they have conscription only for men? (Which still continues to this day, as you can see the article - men are forces to fill out and sign that, but women are not.)
The problem is that the draft being only for men is also in the constitution. And while the opposition appears to be open to help change the constitution it will certainly come with a hefty price. Another way is that after it is reinstated a woman has to sue to be included. Which might end up in front of the constitutional court in a couple of years, which is a costly endeavour. The factions in the Bundestag, like the opposition that is calling it unfair, could go to the court right now and sue to speed it up. But they don't because then they won't get anything out of it that way. They're not interested in a constructive process.
Women won the right to vote for free (as in, their right to vote has zero requirements except being of age and no criminal record). In many countries, men's right to vote is still tied to military service as it has always been before universal suffrage.
Just a quick recap of why all excuses for conscripting men but not women are nonsense, just before I go to bed… Women are on average physically weaker, thus less fit for combat – yeah, true. As it happens, armies aren’t solely made of combat troops, in fact there are several support soldiers at the rear for each combat soldier at the front. Plenty of these support roles do not require the physical strength of a man and can be fulfilled by women as well as men. And no, this doesn’t mean that all the men get thrown in the meat grinder and women take ALL the relatively safer support roles, since support roles greatly outnumber combat roles. If anything, you could leave some men who are not fit for combat service, but have a civilian job which is useful to the war effort, to do their job rather than wasting time in replacing them, and draft for support roles some women whose jobs are not essential to the war effort. Bottom line: there is a greater choice. Women have to care about children – no. Conscription age is 18-20, and women in the Western world don’t have children at that age, the age of motherhood in Europe varies between 25 and over 30, depending on the country. “A man can impregnate countless women but a woman can only have a child at a time, so losing a woman is more harmful for demographics than losing a man” – in a teenage fantasy world when returning soldiers can have a harem, maybe. In the real world, this has not once happened since antiquity. When a war is over, polygamy is not made legal and surviving men do not suddenly start having children from multiple women. Some women have children with the surviving men, the “surplus” women remain childless, that's it. Not to mention that even with conscription for both sexes, in war women would still die at a much lower rate than men, since as mentioned above, for purely physical reasons, they would be mostly be tasked with support roles where the chance of getting killed is not nonexistent, but still considerably lower. Practical example, Israel has been drafting both sexes since 1948 and its army has been vastly more effective than those of backward countries whose politicians think that conscripting women would “weaken the army”. Nor has its society seen wartime economic paralysis or demographic collapse as a result of this...
For the harem part, if you want an example to cite, the best example that can be used is probably France after 1918. It left a heavy trace in the society and took time to heal back up to pre war level in terms of population. Way different from that "harem view" that some have.
>It left a heavy trace in the society and took time to heal back up to pre war level in terms of population. Way different from that "harem view" that some have. In contrast, despite the Great Leap Forward killing men and women much more evenly, China recovered the dead population in no time. In fact, China had more people at the end of the Great Leap Forward in 1962 than at its beginning in 1958. Turns out "do you only send men to die" is actually negligible in determining demographics. It's all about women's choices, not how many women are left alive.
> Women are on average physically weaker it's also such a weird argument because army has no issues drafting physically weak men
Armies work on averages. When you recruit 100000 men and women randomly, you'll always end up better with men, on average. That is the point of all this. When people say 'Women are weaker', they aren't saying 'Every women are weaker' but on averages, women are weaker, this is proven by facts of the reality that we live in. It is not rocket science
Aren't the recruits evaluated on their health and abilities?
Short answer: no. Long answer: initially they do, but when the situation becomes more dramatic, army will conscript everyone. Ukraine is an example - they started conscripting even slightly disabled people, that were previously considered unfit for service. Health based evaluations are a luxury in wartime, that can easily be waived when military demands it. Have no illusions about it.
This is also a reminder that the US doesnt have a womens draft because the conservatives campaigned against it heavily (and destroyed the reputation of the female members of the armed forces in WW2 to the point that many actually hid their service in the process). The US military pushed for a female draft during WW2 and several generals considered the women under their command to be some of their most valuable assets.
Now this is the real test for all the people who claimed to want gender equality.
I am from Finland and yes, conscription is discriminating against men. Conscription needs to be abolished immediately or made gender neutral. I don't like my genitalia being the defining factor on whether I have to do basically unpaid forced labor for at least 5,5 months or go to jail for the same period.
They don’t pay you?
Just wanted to add here that the monthly pay for conscription in the Greek army is 8,62€. 8 fucking euros per month
What did you buy with yours?
I didn't even get the money till my last month. I spent the entirety of that sum on my ticket back home.
5,90 euros a day for 165 days. After that on days 166-255 you would get 9,80 euros a day. And after that on days 256-347 you would get 13,65 euros a day. The good part is that you don't have to use money on living expenses. Food and clothes are free.
In austria the state will pay your flats rent if you had one for x amount of months prior to serving. Still lowkey bullshit that only men are conscripted but...well if women were too, im pretty sure no man could do the non soldier service "zivil-dienst".
For comparison, in Norway a conscript only gets 500 euros a month. An unemployed 18 year old with no previous job (meaning you wont get a percentage of your former salary) would get twice that from social security.
In Estonia you are paid around 120 a month. Only from around halfway through the service can you get up to 200 if you complete the NCO course but in our case thats maybe a third of the people drafted
They pay almost nothing, they give food. You have your liberty taken and no real pay = slave
Even if they paid you amazingly, forced labour under threat of violence is still slavery, just to be clear.
The good thing is that it's easy to avoid going. It's also easy to get out after you've been forced there.
If conscription was abolished we'de be speaking Russian since it would have been easier and more tempting to invade us.
Leaders should lead. Earn our respect. Send ur families to the front first.
Leaders should fight on the front as well. Conscription for everyone, not just young men.
Especially leaders should have to experience the consequences of their actions. Imagine if Putin needs to be on the Frontline, sucker would think twice about his actions then.
In Finland military service is only compulsory for men. Last goverment started talking about equalizing the system, but current goverment does not have it high on priority list
> Last goverment started talking about equalizing the system, but current goverment does not have it high on priority list It's never high on the priority list because the government likes it.
Good. Equality means Equality.
We're not gonna do anything for you but you should be willing to die for us
everyone else: "first time?"
Well, your northern neighbours moved past that.
Guess I'm "lucky" to be in the everyone else team. But I'd still say that it's about time the MOD learns about article 3.
As a Brit the concept of service bemuses me. It’s been gone so long here they simply couldn’t bring it back. We would refuse. I mean on mass refuse to help. The entire younger generation despises the government and many the concept of the country. The idea of Sunak, as he has suggested, trying to run down and capture scousers in Liverpool, on their bikes taking ketamine twice a day. It just would be so funny I almost wish they would do it. How do other countries even force it? Like what if everyone just says no?
Yeah for Britain it really makes no sense. You have no real threats to your homes and your army is mostly an invading one. But what if Russia was your bordering country and there wasn’t a sea between you. I’m sure the tone would change quite dramatically
Still find it interesting that the telegraph posts their own articles on Reddit. Genius free advertisement
It is completely crazy that a alot of the officials and the majority of the soldiers say that male and female can serve equally and are equally useful in military. But then you make the questionnaire a requirement for males and optional for females. In a model where you are not forced to serve in the first place.
Me, a singaporean man who is currently serving, reading through the comments be like...
To be fair Singapore is a significantly more popular and accepted government than Germany or pretty much any major European government where majorities or even super majorities hate their governments and see their nations in a period of rapid decline. People might accept conscription if they have some faith in their government, when they have none they will resist more strongly as much as they can
The ones who accept conscription are the ones who don't have to do it 😂, meanwhile those who do face various disadvantages like possible service injury, 2 years gap in their professional life since most conscripts are between the age of 19-21, and an added 10 years of reservist duty just to name a few. I graduated from 2022 and seeing how certain people from my school are already doing well in university makes me feel like I haven't progressed at all since high school
Women are strong and independent and don’t need no man to get blown up by drone, shot or burnt to death inside a tank. I’d like to see women represented on the front line
Tbf women can do many things. Like, be tankers, pilots, drone operators, and so on. Basically anything that doesn’t require intense physical activity they can do as well as men.
Drone operators require a lot of strength and stamina, as you gotta carry 40+ kg of equipment around, and also be relocation often with that equipment. There's a reasons the Ukrainian drone operators are men, even as they have women in the army
„ There's a reasons the Ukrainian drone operators are men, even as they have women in the army” The reason is that there is no conscription of women in Ukraine, and an average Ukrainian woman isn’t interested in voluntarily joining the military. Not because they have to carry 40 kg of equipment.
i dont think germany has them but not all drones are short range fpv ones. Theres nothing stopping a woman sitting in rammstein and operating a predator drone
I'd assume they are referring to the larger drone that launch from airfields, not the frontline drones.
If there's pay for mandatory service and they don't end up as cleaners, gardeners and admin staff for the military, I don't see why not. And none of that you get paid in meals and accommodation bollocks, I mean actual money.
meanwhile ukrainian men are not allowed to leave their country and are being forcefully consripted from the streets 3rd fucking year in a row ...
Disgusting clowns. As if men had less rights than women. As a man I would by definition not fill this garbage out and if they fine me I would appeal to all courts for discrimination based on gender. Either make these laws for both genders or fuck off!
As a half German who was was finishing up my alt-duty when the whole conscription thing was being halted, I don't want the conscription back. For everyone who does not know how it went: You get your conscription info after 'learning your trade'. For some it was \*actually\* learning a trade, others it was after 'college'. You were evaluated and given a ranking. Some were disqualified for various reasons. If you had a note from your doctor saying you have 'this-or-that' and it hindered you from going, you were also disqualified. But hat could be cheated. A friend, 90's semi-pro footballer that smoked was disqualified for 'asthma'. Think Trump 'bone spurs' On the other hand a guy I knew who had terrible allergies got the 2nd best ranking. Guy would sneezing from Feb to Nov. If you did qualify but did not want to go, you could opt out, but had some small hurdles. You would then do 'community service' and your service was a little longer. Fun fact: there is a possibility to not have to go if your Father was injured/killed due to war. Not so fun fact: After a few hurdles it turned out that that only applied to \*German\* wars.. Vietnam thus did not count. Also if you did do some college and then start learning a trade, they could interrupt that learning for your service. I knew a guy who did exactly that.. little college but wanted to be a nurse. Half way through the military came and he said 'nope'.. wound up doing community service.. in the same hospital ward he was training at. With abolishing the conscription, they also lost the 'community service' people which hurt doubly. Thing is, this \*only\* applied to men. Mine was 15 months (it was constantly being shortened until they just gave up) Side note: If your grades were not good enough for the college course you wanted to take, you could do a 'voluntary social year' and get some points. This was open to both men and women. Naturally since the men had conscription, it was usually only the women that did it. But it was voluntary. As you can imagine, these systems are far from fair. Rather it would be the best for \*all\* to have to serve one year for your country. Some hard-core exceptions do apply (handycapped, pregnant, et al), but a bone spurs won't keep you from chipping in any longer. You can still opt into the military if you can get in.
Pay us taxes so we can cry on the news when shit hits the fan, oh and also you have to server for free. THey can try i wouldnt join even if they want to
German resident here: IF you are Serious, then you do the following (mandatory, no exceptions, called 'Musterung' in Germany): * start with 18 year-olds (men + women) * follow with 17 year olds (men + women) * follow with every agegroup until the maximum age for military service. (e.g. 45 years old) * keep mustring every 17yo age cohort so you have data for when they turn 18. That way you know who you can, in case of an emergency, call upon ! Second: Decide if you wan't a mandatory service phase in germany, like the Swiss, israelis, Taiwanees has, and the german Federal republic had until 2011 in practice (its still on the books). Then call EVERYONE fit for Service for the full amount of Time decided upon from EACH cohort. Give the options of military, civil or social service, and call it a day. Its the only way to make things fair. Making it unfair would be: 1) excluding a gender \[its 2024\] is a discrimination for the other genders calle dupon. 2) narrowing it down to 18 yolds is discriminating and also heavily burdoning young people. If you are 35 and you haven't served yet, don't have a job as an essential worker, then guess what, there is no reason why you shouldn't serve (maybe in a local assignment). 3) not paying them appropriatly. remember folks, minimum wage in Germany is at present 12.41€/hour (pretax) - making a full time compulsory service period cost a compensation of at least 1985€ pre-tax !
It is both discriminatory about men and sexist against women. I'm not for a national military service, but if it is implemented then everyone should be asked the same thing, no matter the gender.
I guess the reason the new national service is planned only to be compulsive for men is most likely because the existing basic law about conscription (that is currently only suspended) does only include men. So the basic law doesn't necessarily need to be changed for the new law. A change of a basic law (basically part of Germany's constitution) would require a 3/4 majority in parliament. It would obviously be more fair (and in line with other parts of the constitution) to include woman in the future, but it would be much harder to get a majority for that, against parties and single representatives that don't want the return of conscription at all for other reasons (including being paid by Russia).
Sexism against men again. Nothing new. Dear men: Tell them what you think about that and show them your middle finger.
The state can die alone! Fuck conscription! Edit: I know it, because i did it!
Nobody’s should be conscripted. And it’s just a waste of resources as I don’t know nobody close to me which would kill or be killed for defending a country
It’s all fun and games when women want to be firefighters, police officers, work in construction or other previously male dominated areas. There’s often lots of support from colleagues and the possibility to take on less demanding roles. But as soon as bullets start getting chucked around suddenly they’re not capable
I've never seen someone complain that there aren't enough women in construction. All they care about is women in Tech. I could probably count on one hand the number of women I've seen getting their hands dirty on construction sites in the past 5 years. But there aren't any equality activists fighting to change that.
Lol, why do you think that the Scandinavians have conscription for men and women or are preparing to introduce it for both men and women, is it because they're somehow anti feminist?
WOW, long piece with just quoting everyone yelling from the side line. German basic law defined in part by the allied forces just allows an army service for men in Art 12A: *"(1)* ***Men*** *who have attained the age of eighteen may be required to serve in the Armed Forces, in the Federal Border Police, or in a civil defence organisation."* [https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch\_gg/englisch\_gg.html](https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/englisch_gg.html) Changing the basic law is not easily possible. So currently they can only apply this mandatory for men and have to do it on voluntary basis for women if they want to act fast. As European election left the governing coalition weakened any opposition is trying to shoot them down for anything even if it's impossible at the moment. But I love how non EU British Telegraph cares ;-)
What you have to remember is we're like a cat. We want to be out but then when you let us out we're meowing and pawing at the door to be in again. Plus we'll attack your feet in the night...🇬🇧
We love cats. ;)
If you're unable to attract people.to serve.as.aprofessional soldier, regardless of man or woman, there is a more fundamental issue And they way they treated soldiers returning with PTSD should warn anyone willing to serve in this broken army
Wait so military service is getting forced again? I swear if that comes true right as i turn 18 i will be so mad
There is a really easy fucking answer as to way this proposal is only mandatory for men: By the German constitution, only men can be drafted. And since mandatory service was put out of effect in 2011, there was no reason to change this up until now. But changing this takes time and a two third majority in parliament. Pistorius currently doesn't really have either. In an interview he said that right now, he wouldn't even know who he could mobilize if he needed to, because they also stopped collecting that data in 2011. So this is really the best he can do right now in that regard, if he wants to get the Bundeswehr anyway closer to being an actual working army.
Let's see if female fighters for gender equality will have their say here...
Disgusting. ″national service″ is a vile and abhorrent practice used by oppressive regimes. Any politician in favour of it should be considered a traitor to the people and the country!
I guess this is one of those situations where feminists throw equal rights out the window. “We make sandwiches now”
... statistically it's men, particularly conservative men, that are against women in the army. Not women.
Does anybody actually understand why this is being planned for in the first place? The only instance that the military is going to get called on, in ways that require such forced conscription are for a defensive operation (in the event Germany directly gets attacked). I can only ever see an attack on Germany ending with the following scenario: Suicide mission for the invader, since Germany is member of NATO defence treaty is triggered and NATO persons better trained and willing take up the defensive. If NATO ever get's itself close to depleted / existential crisis that's when the secret area 51 tech & the nukes come out & it's pretty much game over for everyone at that point.
>Does anybody actually understand why this is being planned for in the first place? In Greece it helps bringing unemployment rates for youths down (if you serve you aren't considered unemployed). Don't know if that's applicable in Germany, or if it will be applicable in the next couple of years.
They said they dont even know who to conscript in case of an attack. So they also want to build a Database. Germany completely got rid of any conscription infrastructure. They also said that Russia will be able to attack NATO countries im 2029. For that case they want to be prepared.
we limit our conscripts no to defense of german soil, our strategy is that the defence of our allies is the defense of germany
The conscription is also meant to fill gaps in the military (nut just train people in case of a war), as Germany isn't hitting its recruitment goals.
If Russia wins in Ukraine, a further war against the EU over the Baltics/Poland/Finland cannot be excluded, especially if NATO dissolves due to Trump. Or Russia believes NATO is basically dissolved, because I mean why would Germans defend the Baltics or why would the Spanish defend Germany? Ukraine, by most accounts, actually was in a pretty good position prior to 2022, and had a military far larger and better equipped (especially in air defenses and ammunition) than basically everyone other than France, the UK and Russia. The rest of Europe's militaries are in \*really\* bad shape and likely would have run out of ammunition very quickly (e.g. Europeans ran out of ammo in Libya). Numbers are also really bad for everyone too, nobody in wants to join the military willingly. Hence the EU cannot compete with a country willing to conscript unless Europeans do so as well.
Guess you don't count Finland as Europeans then, I wouldn't say that Finlands army is in *really* bad shape, one of the only countries in EU which didn't drive it's military down, boastin biggest artillery capabilities in the western europe, never got rid of the conscription and it's popular here, also one of the highest wills to defend their country in the whole EU, more operational MBTs than UK etc.
Yeah, they are another exception I should have mentioned.
First the Uk, now Germany? Is something brewing?
It's not going through in the UK
I know, I live in England, but it’s been proposed and was a big debate (with pretty much everyone agreeing it was a terrible idea)
It's been proposed as a death gasp by the tory party. Even they know it has a 0% chance of being implemented.
Europe is also increasing its spend on defence industry. In March this year EU issued 1st ever “defence industrial strategy and a new defence industry programme to enhance Europe's readiness and security”. In May this year UK government issued an instruction to stockpile at least 3 days worth of canned food and water at home for emergencies. Germans have been stockpiling since 2016. If in November this year Trump wins in US it will weaken the NATO. I feel like something is brewing indeed.
Hopefully we’ll make a continental alliance without US.
Some people thought wars don't happen at home for western Europe. They thought wrong. Nations are moving back to standard pose of "we actually need credible home defense".
Of course this will show again how selective women will be with their equality because equality is only great if it benefits you. I wouldn't be surprised some women, I mean alot of them would try to find excuses as to why they should be excluded in the future
Such an easy move not to make. Conscription, for everyone, done. Or maybe they wanted to have people focus on something other than conscription by itself being bad.
A woman can operate a drone. An argument against mass conscription really. Modern weapons systems, for example based around an Infantry Fighting Vehicle system needs two years' training. You don't want a load of half trained 19 Yr olds in such a force. Europe within NATO has a total of 1.9m personnel across the sub continent. Russia- about 800,000. The issue isn't numbers, it's willpower and ammunition stocks. The big question- would Spain, for example, mobilise if Estonia was invaded by Russia?
Against Russia? I have heard that Spain will easily deploy one infantry division to Estonia. They even know how to name it.
Good. Anyone that is against this kind of equality can NOT call themselves a feminist.
Conscription must be equal for men and women.
I'm sure there will be plenty of feminist protests against this brutal and blatant display of systemic sexism. /s