Europe
News and information from Europe ๐ช๐บ
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
Rules (2024-08-30)
- This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
- No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
- Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
- No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
- Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
- Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
- No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
- Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
Posts that link to the following sources will be removed
- on any topic: Al Mayadeen, brusselssignal:eu, citjourno:com, europesays:com, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Fox, GB News, geo-trends:eu, news-pravda:com, OAN, RT, sociable:co, any AI slop sites (when in doubt please look for a credible imprint/about page), change:org (for privacy reasons), archive:is,ph,today (their JS DDoS websites)
- on Middle-East topics: Al Jazeera
- on Hungary: Euronews
Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com
(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)
Ban lengths, etc.
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the admin that applied the rule (check modlog first to find who was it.)
view the rest of the comments
In short: I'd refuse, oppose it and campaign against it.
I owe politians nothing. The rethoric about patriotism, duty and all the other arguments commonly used to carry forward pro-draft, pro-defense, pro-rearmament, etc, are hollow.
There are bad actors in this world but politians still confuse public office with unbridled authority and people allow for it like sheep.
Draft as been talked about in my country (Portugal) a few years back, by people that never served as military, from a "conservative" sector of society, using arguments gravitating about ingraining "values" about patriotism, discipline and sacrifice to the younger generations.
Translation: you are to be braiwashed, forced to obey, never question and die where and when ordered.
I risk most will defend their home and family at the risk of cost of their health and life if a bad actor arises. But that in no way leads to the logic for need of a standing army.
Peace is peace. Armed peace is a veiled threat.
You say "...if a bad actor arises." But we already have those bad actors at our doorstep, they don't need to arise. I don't think we would be able to defend against Russia if we didn't have standing armies. A quickly mounted militia is no match for a standing army, so I would say there is a pressing need and logic for a standing army.
Admittedly, Portugal is at the other end of Europe and not really threatened by Russia, but arguing against standing armies in general because it would be other nations fighting for you is a bad argument imo.
But I actually agree. Armed peace is a veiled threat. A threat against Russia (and other hostile nations) to leave the European Nations and democracy in peace.
Many people in the world will disagree with that view.
A standing army is a lumbersome beast. It requires supplies for both machines and soldiers, space, infrastructure.
A loosely organized resistance can severely hinder or even cripple such a force with assimetric warfare.
People fighting for a belief fight with resolution.
I mean, yeah sure, but a lot of people in the world would also agree with me. Neither of those things make a point though.
It may be more cost-effective, but definitely not human-life-effective. I guess it depends on what you value more. Money and and materials or human life? Because I can guarantee asymmetric warfare costs a lot of lives. I mean just ask the Vietnamese if they would rather have had an army capable of fighting the US. Or the Iraqi. Or ask the Ukrainians if they prefer their army fighting Russia or having to fight civilian asymmetric warfare. You don't want to have a civilian fighting force against a foe that has invested in a modern military with Anti Air, tanks, missiles, drones, trained personnel.
I personally prefer paying the price of war in money and materials than in the lives of my fellow citizens.
I don't disagree but are you implying that this is not true for a standing army?
Plus whoever organises these resistances will end up as an Organisation akin to an army anyway. So you just end up with what you didn't want but only weaker and less able to defend against an attacker.
It can be risked, with a fair degree of confidence, considering what is transpiring from the ongoing wars that what is considered conventional warfare is changing at a tremendous speed.
Air superiority, conventional artilery, mobile armour, highly sophisticated and expensive weapons systems are being rendered useless, powerless or at least less than superior, by cheaper, often disposable solutions.
This entire combat landscape change, in my view, is the early warning of a deeper trend where human resources will be much more valuable than machinery and conventional armies are a liability, not an asset.
Small, highly mobile, capable of underground, covert operation groups - guerrilla warfare - will be a game changer.
Please read my comment again.
Deleted.. Read through too fast. Silly me.
No worries
I'm hypothetically in favor of abolishing war machines as well, but this can only be achieved if workers organize internationally to overthrow their and every other state everywhere in the world simultaneously. States are literally war machines funded by taxes; everything else they do is done to the extent it helps pacify the people who'd otherwise organize themselves and rise against borders, conscription and being governed rather than governing ourselves. I also understand that fighting against states will probably be comparable to a war in terms of bloodiness and chaos, and will have to repeat whenever a new gang appears and tries to become a state.
A state is a necessary organism within a country. What is unnecessary is the ease with which polititians move into a space where they think themselves as untouchable, unaccountable and unquestionable.
To occupy a position of responsability is exactly that: a position of responsability. This implies the appointing must be short, highly supervised and the actions must be transparent and easily auditable. It is not a life long appointment, with unchecked and unlimited reach and power, as we see commonly done today.
The very notion of state must change. The state is the sum of all individuals contained within a country's borders. They all must enjoy the same rights and protections in and from the law and be capable of actively intervene on the governance of the nation, with a government assigned to do the general management.
To use a quote I find very much enlightning: people should no fear their governments; governments should fear their people.