You can easily refuse. Even easier once you get to the point where they actually hand you a gun to use. (Or, if from the US, just pick one from your nearest CVS)
I mean, conscription is basically forcing people to go to war through the threat of violence. There are plenty of modern examples of people either being forced to go to war or to be imprisoned or killed.
I get the general idea that you still ultimately have a choice to make, but a choice between serving or being imprisoned or worse still implies coercion.
You can resist imprisonment. Even easier once you are handed the gun.
Basically, “get on board” with the program, let them train you until the point they give you a weapon and tell you to “go after the enemy”, then do exactly as they say. We all know who the enemy is, after all.
Right, but my point is that you are still being forced. The legal definition of force isn’t someone successfully gets you to do the thing they wanted to, it’s being coerced via the threat of violence or imprisonment.
Even if you decide to frag your commander, your life is still being endangered. Also, what you are advocating is a lot easier to say than do. Lower enlisted conscripts during unpopular wars develop a pretty strong bond because there is a lack of choice. No one wants to be there and no one really wants to die, or see their buddies get meaninglessly killed.
Militaries who regularly employ conscripted forces know how to control and manipulate there conscripts into doing their jobs, even when they really don’t want to. If you want some pretty horrific accounts of this you can read about Russian conscription during the days of the Romanov empire.
No one forces you to fight in a war, dumbass.
You can easily refuse. Even easier once you get to the point where they actually hand you a gun to use. (Or, if from the US, just pick one from your nearest CVS)
I mean, conscription is basically forcing people to go to war through the threat of violence. There are plenty of modern examples of people either being forced to go to war or to be imprisoned or killed.
I get the general idea that you still ultimately have a choice to make, but a choice between serving or being imprisoned or worse still implies coercion.
You can resist imprisonment. Even easier once you are handed the gun.
Basically, “get on board” with the program, let them train you until the point they give you a weapon and tell you to “go after the enemy”, then do exactly as they say. We all know who the enemy is, after all.
Right, but my point is that you are still being forced. The legal definition of force isn’t someone successfully gets you to do the thing they wanted to, it’s being coerced via the threat of violence or imprisonment.
Even if you decide to frag your commander, your life is still being endangered. Also, what you are advocating is a lot easier to say than do. Lower enlisted conscripts during unpopular wars develop a pretty strong bond because there is a lack of choice. No one wants to be there and no one really wants to die, or see their buddies get meaninglessly killed.
Militaries who regularly employ conscripted forces know how to control and manipulate there conscripts into doing their jobs, even when they really don’t want to. If you want some pretty horrific accounts of this you can read about Russian conscription during the days of the Romanov empire.