6 ms·

If you think that's all there is to it, you probably can't be convinced of anything.

notahacker 11y ago
If you want to convince people, you could try naming a horror of war that conscripts aren't subjected to or at risk of instead of making snarky personal remarks...
- EdHominem 11y ago
  Of course they face the horrors of war. But they're the ones in a place to do something about it. They have time to plan after getting their notice, they're in a free country where they can buy arms, etc.
  - notahacker 11y ago
    Except of course, for the ones not living in free countries. With the countries doing the most conscription tending to be disproportionately not-free, and/or already suffering from attacks on their civilian population. A civilian population which regardless of how bad things have got has a bit more freedom to leave the country than those [about to be] drafted into the army. And seriously, you're suggesting buying arms is a way for conscripts to avoid the horrors of war? This subthread is like a magnet for untenable arguments.
    - EdHominem 11y ago
      > Except of course, for the ones not living in free countries. Gosh, pardon me for talking about the countries on the continent I was born on. > A civilian population which regardless of how bad things have got has a bit more freedom to leave the country than those [about to be] drafted into the army. Historical history fail. American draftees had the ability to cross the borders legally before their reporting date, and the borders were porous and easily crossed anyways. Vietnamese civilians would have had to walk hundreds of miles, crossing mine fields, into even less friendly countries, if they even knew a war was declared before the bomb destroyed their village. > And seriously, you're suggesting [...] No matter how hard the conscript has it, their victims will have it worse. I'm not suggesting, I'm flat-out saying that if you don't take extreme measures to avoid shooting innocents, you're a murderer. When you're drafted it's too late to avoid some horror but you can keep from making it worse for everyone.
      - notahacker 11y ago
        So your refutation of the concept that "both military and civilians have it bad" involves the assumption that the United States is the only country, Vietnam was the only war, and people called up to the military can easily avoid the trauma of being shot at and having to take other human lives by.... buying a gun and starting a firefight. That's not the best line of argument I've come across. Although when it comes to Vietnam, I did once chat with an older Vietnamese person in Vietnam who said his worst experience of war was seeing banged up American GIs in the hospital next door. Other Vietnamese civilians' worst experiences were food shortages as the war largely passed their particular inconsequential valley by. Others died agonising deaths under bombardment, which was disproportionately likely and certainly no less painful if they happened to have [been] signed up for one of the armies and sent to guard something. Not all experiences of war are the same, but as a general rule you're going to spend a lot more time being shot at if you're a soldier, and probably don't feel better for shooting back, especially if you're a conscript.
        EdHominem 11y ago
        > the assumption that the United States is the only country [...] Do you see the part of the earlier message where I said "literally every war in every country?" No? Maybe because I didn't write that... > That's not the best line of argument I've come across. You need to read the entirety of my messages and not add anything of your own, otherwise you're just arguing with yourself. > people called up to the military can easily avoid the trauma of being shot at and having to take other human lives by.... buying a gun and starting a firefight. Sigh, no. Where did I say easily? It's your responsibility to not be forced into murdering innocents. If you can more-easily leave the country, great. If not, even jail is better than killing people, but if all else fails - it's better to shoot the people conscripting you than be forced to kill innocents. > probably don't feel better for shooting back Who said it was enjoyable? But the conscripts still have more agency than the civilians they're firing at.
        notahacker 11y ago
        I'm still struggling to see where your obtuse fixation on the idea that conscripts are obliged to murder the people conscripting them in order to avoid a hypothetical future scenario in which they might be ordered to kill civilians actually counters my original argument that civilians generally don't suffer more in war zones than troops. I mean, if I was going to try to refute that argument I'd probably say something like "except when there's a food shortage and the soldiers have all the requisitioning power" rather than branching into obtuse lines of argument about last resort responsibility to shoot recruiting sergeants. Sorry, but taking out the word "easily" doesn't make the argument that prospective conscripts have more agency to avoid the unpleasantness of potentially having to shoot people because they can buy a civilian firearm (unlike civilians?!) and fire first any less silly. And no, soldiers generally ordered to follow a particular course of action on pain of death generally don't have more agency than civilians who generally aren't under such orders. In particular, civilians are far more likely to be allowed to permanently leave the war zone(s) at any given time than soldiers, and far less likely to be intentionally fired at.

If you want to convince people, you could try naming a horror of war that conscripts aren't subjected to or at risk of instead of making snarky personal remarks...

EdHominem 11y ago
Of course they face the horrors of war. But they're the ones in a place to do something about it. They have time to plan after getting their notice, they're in a free country where they can buy arms, etc.
- notahacker 11y ago
  Except of course, for the ones not living in free countries. With the countries doing the most conscription tending to be disproportionately not-free, and/or already suffering from attacks on their civilian population. A civilian population which regardless of how bad things have got has a bit more freedom to leave the country than those [about to be] drafted into the army. And seriously, you're suggesting buying arms is a way for conscripts to avoid the horrors of war? This subthread is like a magnet for untenable arguments.
  - EdHominem 11y ago
    > Except of course, for the ones not living in free countries. Gosh, pardon me for talking about the countries on the continent I was born on. > A civilian population which regardless of how bad things have got has a bit more freedom to leave the country than those [about to be] drafted into the army. Historical history fail. American draftees had the ability to cross the borders legally before their reporting date, and the borders were porous and easily crossed anyways. Vietnamese civilians would have had to walk hundreds of miles, crossing mine fields, into even less friendly countries, if they even knew a war was declared before the bomb destroyed their village. > And seriously, you're suggesting [...] No matter how hard the conscript has it, their victims will have it worse. I'm not suggesting, I'm flat-out saying that if you don't take extreme measures to avoid shooting innocents, you're a murderer. When you're drafted it's too late to avoid some horror but you can keep from making it worse for everyone.
    - notahacker 11y ago
      So your refutation of the concept that "both military and civilians have it bad" involves the assumption that the United States is the only country, Vietnam was the only war, and people called up to the military can easily avoid the trauma of being shot at and having to take other human lives by.... buying a gun and starting a firefight. That's not the best line of argument I've come across. Although when it comes to Vietnam, I did once chat with an older Vietnamese person in Vietnam who said his worst experience of war was seeing banged up American GIs in the hospital next door. Other Vietnamese civilians' worst experiences were food shortages as the war largely passed their particular inconsequential valley by. Others died agonising deaths under bombardment, which was disproportionately likely and certainly no less painful if they happened to have [been] signed up for one of the armies and sent to guard something. Not all experiences of war are the same, but as a general rule you're going to spend a lot more time being shot at if you're a soldier, and probably don't feel better for shooting back, especially if you're a conscript.
      - EdHominem 11y ago
        > the assumption that the United States is the only country [...] Do you see the part of the earlier message where I said "literally every war in every country?" No? Maybe because I didn't write that... > That's not the best line of argument I've come across. You need to read the entirety of my messages and not add anything of your own, otherwise you're just arguing with yourself. > people called up to the military can easily avoid the trauma of being shot at and having to take other human lives by.... buying a gun and starting a firefight. Sigh, no. Where did I say easily? It's your responsibility to not be forced into murdering innocents. If you can more-easily leave the country, great. If not, even jail is better than killing people, but if all else fails - it's better to shoot the people conscripting you than be forced to kill innocents. > probably don't feel better for shooting back Who said it was enjoyable? But the conscripts still have more agency than the civilians they're firing at.
        notahacker 11y ago
        I'm still struggling to see where your obtuse fixation on the idea that conscripts are obliged to murder the people conscripting them in order to avoid a hypothetical future scenario in which they might be ordered to kill civilians actually counters my original argument that civilians generally don't suffer more in war zones than troops. I mean, if I was going to try to refute that argument I'd probably say something like "except when there's a food shortage and the soldiers have all the requisitioning power" rather than branching into obtuse lines of argument about last resort responsibility to shoot recruiting sergeants. Sorry, but taking out the word "easily" doesn't make the argument that prospective conscripts have more agency to avoid the unpleasantness of potentially having to shoot people because they can buy a civilian firearm (unlike civilians?!) and fire first any less silly. And no, soldiers generally ordered to follow a particular course of action on pain of death generally don't have more agency than civilians who generally aren't under such orders. In particular, civilians are far more likely to be allowed to permanently leave the war zone(s) at any given time than soldiers, and far less likely to be intentionally fired at.