4 ms·

Israeli Supreme Court says ultra-Orthodox must serve in military

52 points by croes 2y ago

saltserv 2y ago
[dead]
braza 2y ago
More than fair and forces a more real and deep skin in the game for those more hawkish around defend their own land. ::marginally-related:: For the US folks, how you feel with this kind of discrepancy around people hawkish around military involvement but not directly having that kind of skin in the game? In some point in past I was living in Wyoming and saw all the poles around the main avenue with a lot of young military folks in KIA/MIA pictures as some way of remembrance and at the same time guys in talking heads show asking for more military personnel in the same conflict. (PS: No horse in the race in this current conflict).
- maskil 2y ago
  The Hareidi parties are actually the least hawkish in the current government, and historically were equally willing to prop up left wing governments. "Security" related issues are not on their agenda.
  - jfengel 2y ago
    You're correct; they are mostly neutral on those issues. But note that "least hawkish in the current government" is an extremely low bar to cross.
- alistairSH 2y ago
  The whole ultra-orthodox situation is weird to me - not only did they get out of compulsory military service, they also receive massive welfare benefits that apparently aren't generally available (few of them work - they spend all their time studying). But, I don't know anything beyond what I'm reading in US-based newspapers, so maybe there's more to it. As for the situation in the US - I definitely hate that hawkish politicians rarely have any skin in the game. I might have a warped view living in DC, but the senior officer corp is often made up of generational military. And the enlisted soldiers are very often from disadvantaged areas. Having a volunteer military is a good thing, but it feels like (no data to back this up) we're well along the path of creating a military "caste" or two. If anybody has data about the family histories of current enlisted soldiers and officers, I'd be interested to see if my thought bares out.
  - Dalewyn 2y ago
    It's worth noting that back in the medieval ages, most of the nobles (sometimes even the king) would be on the frontlines with the peasants, men-at-arms, and everyone in between. The ruling class could win and more importantly lose everything including their lives in an instant every time they went to war. Contrast now where the politicians declaring wars and the generals commanding them seldom leave their gilded halls and fortified bunkers deep in the homeland. Wars are easier to wage when you don't have to stick your own neck out. The advent of unmanned warfare will probably make this worse before it can get better.
    - bell-cot 2y ago
      > ...back in the medieval ages... You can just go back to the WWII era, and leading American families were pulling strings to make sure their younger sons were serving in the military - with a strong preference for front-line combat positions. Look at Joseph / John / Robert / Edward Kennedy. George Bush Sr. was one of the youngest combat pilots in the U.S. Navy. All four of President Roosevelt's sons served in WWII; as did his only son-in-law. Etc., etc.
  - KittenInABox 2y ago
    There was actually a study in 2017 about this... "The authors conclude the implications are mixed. On the positive side of the ledger, they report that the United States now possesses a more ready and professionalized military than ever before. On the negative side, this force consists of a dwindling percentage of the population, who are more isolated from mainstream American society than ever before. As a growing percentage of service members and officers are coming from military families themselves, the choice to join the military is becoming more akin to a decision to join the family business. The result is greater divisions between the “Warrior Caste” and the civilian population than the numbers would indicate if taken at face value. " https://inss.ndu.edu/Media/News/Article/1428887/deconstructing-the-warrior-caste-the-beliefs-and-backgrounds-of-senior-military/ https://inss.ndu.edu/Media/News/Article/1428887/deconstructi...
    - alistairSH 2y ago
threeseed 2y ago
I wonder if they will take a different view on war-mongering when it is their sons and daughters dying on the front line.
- 2rsf 2y ago
  THOSE Ultra Orthodox are not the ones you are thinking about, they are real ultra religious people that actually goes to Yeshiva's and study the bible or whatever they study there.
  - grugagag 2y ago
    They’re settling on disputed lands and slowly pushing out Palestinians. Who is defending them at all times? Israeli soldiers who are not Ultra Ortodox. I think it’s good to give them a taste of conscription, all other Israelis do it, male, female, no exceptions. They are the exception.
    - 2rsf 2y ago
      Not those Ultra Orthodoxes. They are mostly located in undisputed places like Bnei Brak, Jerusalem, Harish or Bet Shemesh. Religious settlers tend to serve in the army, although sometimes for a shorter period (in a Yeshivat Hesder). Having said that, the ruling is just and make sense.
      - weatherlite 2y ago
        That is incorrect there are quite large Jewish orthodox cities inside Palestinian territories Like Elad and Beitar Elit. They are quite big. However they are relatively close to the Israeli border and not 'in your face' settlements.
- invalidname 2y ago
  I wonder if people will actually bother learning about the subject and history of a place before forming an opinion and posting online... Hasidim don't care about anything related to this. They don't want to be in the army because they want to study Torah and because they could get away with it. Israelis have a draft law. Many have died in Gaza, Lebanon etc. Everyone in Israel is related or knows someone related to someone who died recently in this conflict. Finally, that stupidity of "skin in the game" is astounding to me. The more people die the longer the war takes because "they couldn't have died for nothing". It becomes more brutal too because we can't risk our children fighting over there.
therobots927 2y ago
This is good news. But I think both Israel and the US should pass a law that the child of any senior member of government, who is also old enough to serve (18-35) and has no dependents should be automatically deployed to combat. No exceptions except for medical conditions that significantly impact ability to fight. Let’s see how many pointless wars get started then.
- Ekaros 2y ago
  Why should having dependents be get away free? Shouldn't it double the service time per dependent. After all there is more skin in the game. Single people should be last to be forced to fight wars...
  - therobots927 2y ago
    I don’t really understand why you don’t think single people should fight in wars but sure I was just throwing some ideas out there.
    - alistairSH 2y ago
      I think he inelegantly arguing the opposite - why should having a family get somebody out of otherwise compulsory service? That ends up just being an incentive for the kids of politicians to breed early and often.
- inglor_cz 2y ago
  This would, in the long run, fill the government with true hawks that hold genuine warlike values and don't mind their kids dying for the greater glory of the nation, or childless people. Isn't that a bit of a perverse incentive, or at least result you don't want to see?
  - therobots927 2y ago
    I did think of that. Maybe we need to add a financial requirement, where politicians must pay twice higher personal taxes during war time to help cover costs?
botanical 2y ago
Sounds like Russia (and Apartheid South Africa before this, where I'm from) forcing their citizens to fight this genocide. What kind of a democracy is Apartheid Israel, where you can't remove yourself from doing something you feel unjust? EDIT. Wow, seconds later and I'm downvoted. Sounds like the Hasbara bots are here too.
- jamincan 2y ago
  I suspect you're being downvoted because you are demonstrating a lack of understanding of the political situation in Israel. The governing party in Israel has been propped up by ultra-orthodox parties that have no skin in the game because they and their families are exempt from the draft. Far from being conscientious objectors, the ultra-orthodox have enabled and supported the current situation without suffering the consequences of it.
- gambiting 2y ago
  >>where you can't remove yourself from doing something you feel unjust? They aren't skipping conscription because they think it's unjust, they are skipping it because they say they want to study religious scripts instead. And in fact if you wanted to use that excuse to skip military service you wouldn't be able to without being part of a certain group beforehand. Now the court is removing that exception.
- xenospn 2y ago
  You’re not downvoted because of “hasbara bots”. You’re downvoted because your comment is nonsense.
- pixxel 2y ago
  I’m not a bot.
maskil 2y ago
People, the most hawkish parties in the current government are also the most over represented in the army. Don't project US issues on everyone else.
- invalidname 2y ago
  That isn't true for the case of Israel. Almost half of the current government didn't serve in the required army duty. Some were rejected by the army for their extremist views which in the past would have also banned them from elected office.

52 points by croes 2y ago

[dead]

More than fair and forces a more real and deep skin in the game for those more hawkish around defend their own land. ::marginally-related:: For the US folks, how you feel with this kind of discrepancy around people hawkish around military involvement but not directly having that kind of skin in the game? In some point in past I was living in Wyoming and saw all the poles around the main avenue with a lot of young military folks in KIA/MIA pictures as some way of remembrance and at the same time guys in talking heads show asking for more military personnel in the same conflict. (PS: No horse in the race in this current conflict).

maskil 2y ago
The Hareidi parties are actually the least hawkish in the current government, and historically were equally willing to prop up left wing governments. "Security" related issues are not on their agenda.
- jfengel 2y ago
  You're correct; they are mostly neutral on those issues. But note that "least hawkish in the current government" is an extremely low bar to cross.
alistairSH 2y ago
The whole ultra-orthodox situation is weird to me - not only did they get out of compulsory military service, they also receive massive welfare benefits that apparently aren't generally available (few of them work - they spend all their time studying). But, I don't know anything beyond what I'm reading in US-based newspapers, so maybe there's more to it. As for the situation in the US - I definitely hate that hawkish politicians rarely have any skin in the game. I might have a warped view living in DC, but the senior officer corp is often made up of generational military. And the enlisted soldiers are very often from disadvantaged areas. Having a volunteer military is a good thing, but it feels like (no data to back this up) we're well along the path of creating a military "caste" or two. If anybody has data about the family histories of current enlisted soldiers and officers, I'd be interested to see if my thought bares out.
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  It's worth noting that back in the medieval ages, most of the nobles (sometimes even the king) would be on the frontlines with the peasants, men-at-arms, and everyone in between. The ruling class could win and more importantly lose everything including their lives in an instant every time they went to war. Contrast now where the politicians declaring wars and the generals commanding them seldom leave their gilded halls and fortified bunkers deep in the homeland. Wars are easier to wage when you don't have to stick your own neck out. The advent of unmanned warfare will probably make this worse before it can get better.
  - bell-cot 2y ago
    > ...back in the medieval ages... You can just go back to the WWII era, and leading American families were pulling strings to make sure their younger sons were serving in the military - with a strong preference for front-line combat positions. Look at Joseph / John / Robert / Edward Kennedy. George Bush Sr. was one of the youngest combat pilots in the U.S. Navy. All four of President Roosevelt's sons served in WWII; as did his only son-in-law. Etc., etc.
- KittenInABox 2y ago
  There was actually a study in 2017 about this... "The authors conclude the implications are mixed. On the positive side of the ledger, they report that the United States now possesses a more ready and professionalized military than ever before. On the negative side, this force consists of a dwindling percentage of the population, who are more isolated from mainstream American society than ever before. As a growing percentage of service members and officers are coming from military families themselves, the choice to join the military is becoming more akin to a decision to join the family business. The result is greater divisions between the “Warrior Caste” and the civilian population than the numbers would indicate if taken at face value. " https://inss.ndu.edu/Media/News/Article/1428887/deconstructing-the-warrior-caste-the-beliefs-and-backgrounds-of-senior-military/ https://inss.ndu.edu/Media/News/Article/1428887/deconstructi...
  - alistairSH 2y ago

threeseed 2y ago

I wonder if they will take a different view on war-mongering when it is their sons and daughters dying on the front line.

2rsf 2y ago
THOSE Ultra Orthodox are not the ones you are thinking about, they are real ultra religious people that actually goes to Yeshiva's and study the bible or whatever they study there.
- grugagag 2y ago
  They’re settling on disputed lands and slowly pushing out Palestinians. Who is defending them at all times? Israeli soldiers who are not Ultra Ortodox. I think it’s good to give them a taste of conscription, all other Israelis do it, male, female, no exceptions. They are the exception.
  - 2rsf 2y ago
    Not those Ultra Orthodoxes. They are mostly located in undisputed places like Bnei Brak, Jerusalem, Harish or Bet Shemesh. Religious settlers tend to serve in the army, although sometimes for a shorter period (in a Yeshivat Hesder). Having said that, the ruling is just and make sense.
    - weatherlite 2y ago
      That is incorrect there are quite large Jewish orthodox cities inside Palestinian territories Like Elad and Beitar Elit. They are quite big. However they are relatively close to the Israeli border and not 'in your face' settlements.
invalidname 2y ago
I wonder if people will actually bother learning about the subject and history of a place before forming an opinion and posting online... Hasidim don't care about anything related to this. They don't want to be in the army because they want to study Torah and because they could get away with it. Israelis have a draft law. Many have died in Gaza, Lebanon etc. Everyone in Israel is related or knows someone related to someone who died recently in this conflict. Finally, that stupidity of "skin in the game" is astounding to me. The more people die the longer the war takes because "they couldn't have died for nothing". It becomes more brutal too because we can't risk our children fighting over there.

therobots927 2y ago

This is good news. But I think both Israel and the US should pass a law that the child of any senior member of government, who is also old enough to serve (18-35) and has no dependents should be automatically deployed to combat. No exceptions except for medical conditions that significantly impact ability to fight. Let’s see how many pointless wars get started then.

Ekaros 2y ago
Why should having dependents be get away free? Shouldn't it double the service time per dependent. After all there is more skin in the game. Single people should be last to be forced to fight wars...
- therobots927 2y ago
  I don’t really understand why you don’t think single people should fight in wars but sure I was just throwing some ideas out there.
  - alistairSH 2y ago
    I think he inelegantly arguing the opposite - why should having a family get somebody out of otherwise compulsory service? That ends up just being an incentive for the kids of politicians to breed early and often.
inglor_cz 2y ago
This would, in the long run, fill the government with true hawks that hold genuine warlike values and don't mind their kids dying for the greater glory of the nation, or childless people. Isn't that a bit of a perverse incentive, or at least result you don't want to see?
- therobots927 2y ago
  I did think of that. Maybe we need to add a financial requirement, where politicians must pay twice higher personal taxes during war time to help cover costs?

botanical 2y ago

Sounds like Russia (and Apartheid South Africa before this, where I'm from) forcing their citizens to fight this genocide. What kind of a democracy is Apartheid Israel, where you can't remove yourself from doing something you feel unjust? EDIT. Wow, seconds later and I'm downvoted. Sounds like the Hasbara bots are here too.

jamincan 2y ago
I suspect you're being downvoted because you are demonstrating a lack of understanding of the political situation in Israel. The governing party in Israel has been propped up by ultra-orthodox parties that have no skin in the game because they and their families are exempt from the draft. Far from being conscientious objectors, the ultra-orthodox have enabled and supported the current situation without suffering the consequences of it.
gambiting 2y ago
>>where you can't remove yourself from doing something you feel unjust? They aren't skipping conscription because they think it's unjust, they are skipping it because they say they want to study religious scripts instead. And in fact if you wanted to use that excuse to skip military service you wouldn't be able to without being part of a certain group beforehand. Now the court is removing that exception.
xenospn 2y ago
You’re not downvoted because of “hasbara bots”. You’re downvoted because your comment is nonsense.
pixxel 2y ago
I’m not a bot.

maskil 2y ago

People, the most hawkish parties in the current government are also the most over represented in the army. Don't project US issues on everyone else.

invalidname 2y ago
That isn't true for the case of Israel. Almost half of the current government didn't serve in the required army duty. Some were rejected by the army for their extremist views which in the past would have also banned them from elected office.