18 ms·

German men 18-45 need military permit for extended stays abroad

• webnrrd2k 6mo ago
  Press gangs are back
• The_suffocated 6mo ago
  Not all men, but all men over 17 and under the age of 45. This still seems draconian, though.
  • raffael_de 6mo ago
    Number of characters for the title is limited. And while I wouldn't necessarily call it draconian because after all somebody has to defend my country; it in deed comes as a shock. And it is also shocking that I just randomly stumbled over this news article when this law is in effect already for 3 months. How is it possible that our news talk about all sorts of nonsense but not about something as fundamentally relevant as this ... this is the real shock.
    • mnmalst 6mo ago
      I agree in general. One reason we haven't heard anything about it might be that the administration already admitted that this legislation needs correction or at least clarification, as mentioned in the article.
      • kristianc 6mo ago
        Draconian law gets introduced, public outcry ensues. Oh okay we will make it six months then. This is how civil liberties get eroded.
      • raffael_de 6mo ago
        No, that is not mentioned in the article. The correction and clarification is regarding how exactly this is being implemented. The law is there ... don't think this is a mistake. And there should be serious discussions in a society before something like that is made a law.
        • mnmalst 6mo ago
          Fair, yes I agree. Didn't mean to excuse anything they introduced.
    • uyzstvqs 6mo ago
      > And while I wouldn't necessarily call it draconian because after all somebody has to defend my country The ends don't justify the means. Conscription has no place in the free world. It's slavery, plain and simple. Going into the military should be an appealing career choice. Our soldiers are supposed to be highly skilled professionals, not cannon fodder in large quantities.
      • raffael_de 6mo ago
        So, if some other country with different value system attacks your homeland with intention to effectively colonize it then you'd be okay with just letting it happen?
        • kiviuq 6mo ago
          I believe it is up to the free individual to make that decision. I'm not saving the slave ship when I'm treated like one. ps: There are 8 billion people on this planet, and I've never had any serious issues with any of them, much less a reason to start a war. Governments are always the cause of everyone's misery. Beware of yours!
          • IAmBroom 6mo ago
            We now know for certain you don't live in Ukraine, nor any other country that has been invaded in your lifetime.
            • kiviuq 6mo ago
              My family is from Ramallah so my wish to die for someone's greater cause is somewhat constrained.
        • uyzstvqs 6mo ago
          No. I support a strong, volunteer military force of highly trained professionals (AVF). For example, how the US Army works today. It's not only moral and compatible with human rights in the free world, it's also far more effective.
    • haukem 6mo ago
      I am also surprised that I haven't read about this in German news before. I am following the news. If Trump would have signed an executive order with a similar content affecting US citizen, German media would probably report about this multiple days long with many articles. I was looking in Google news for other reports about this, but only found an article from Berliner Zeitung published 5 hours after this article from Frankfurter Rundschau. I am worried about what other information which could be important to me, the news did not report on. As far as I understood the law the article from FR is correct: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/wehrpflg/__3.html https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/wehrpflg/__3.html
    • subsistence234 6mo ago
      Really exposes the current state of journalism in Germany and more broadly Europe: just propaganda and gossip. A functioning "fourth estate" would have reported on this *before* the law was passed.
  • nwellnhof 6mo ago
    The law says all men aged 17 and older, not military-aged. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/wehrpflg/__3.html https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/wehrpflg/__3.html
    • ffsm8 6mo ago
      From your link (3) Die Wehrpflicht endet mit Ablauf des Jahres, in dem der Wehrpflichtige das 45. Lebensjahr vollendet.
  • jalapenoj 6mo ago
    Drafts seem like an outdated pre-globalist concept. Die for the borders nobody respects anyway. You need to be nationalistic when it’s useful to your leaders that hate you. Of course just the natives need to die, all the immigrants won’t be doing that.
    • someguydave 6mo ago
      Fine you can make do in the Congo with everyone else who disrespects borders
      • pfannkuchen 6mo ago
        Are you proposing we send undocumented migrants to the Congo? That’s a terrible idea!
  • znpy 6mo ago
    It’s also discriminatory on the basis of the gender, “weird” that nobody’s complaining about that.
    • atmavatar 6mo ago
      Men are biologically disposable. If a nation lost 90% or better of its adult male population, it could still bounce back within a generation or two. Women have no incentive to change that, and the small fraction of men powerful enough to change it can already exempt themselves from the meat grinder. The remaining men's opinions don't matter.
      • znpy 6mo ago
        And farewell gender equality I guess.
      • postsantum 6mo ago
        German women as capable as men, btw. How about to stop this sexist bullshit
        • Sabinus 6mo ago
          One woman can have one child a year. One man can have hundreds of children a year. This isn't sexist, it's reality. It's the rationale for male conscription and male disposability.
        • array_key_first 6mo ago
          It's not about capability, it's about value. Women's lives are valuable, men's are not. This has been the case across basically all societies in human history. Losing a ton of men really doesn't matter too much - especially young, family-less men. Losing a lot of women, though, is really really bad.
          • postsantum 6mo ago
            I was informed that we are all equal. Plenty of wartime occupancies carry no risk of dying, like being a nurse
• klausa 6mo ago
  That seems more “oh we fucked up and didn’t realize our changes to the law imply this” than “Germany forces men to request permission to leave”.
  • raffael_de 6mo ago
    Highly doubt it. This is a very new addition. Their fuck up was to pretend for ideological reasons that a country doesn't need an army. And that the concept of considering a country home and its culture as something worth preserving is just right wing bs. Now they are surprised that only very few men deliberately registered for armed service ...
    • klausa 6mo ago
      We’ll see, I guess. The quotes very much read to me like someone realizing what the change of Paragraph 2 means to Paragraph 3 means in real time and having to figure out what to answer to journalists. I’m curious how that would work administratively though - would they require you to have that when trying to do Ausmeldung? And what about those who moved out before this law got changed? Technically, do I need to go Bundeswehr office when I come back next time, to get the permission? I _want_ to believe if this was a deliberate change that someone cared about; we wouldn’t be having this discussion right now because there would be clear answers to the very obvious questions here, but maybe my hope is misplaced.
      • raffael_de 6mo ago
        I'm not sure you understand how laws are made. It's not like "ooops a new law, who did that?" It's going through all sorts of processes with lots of people involved. And even if this is just an "innocent mistake", well, that would mean our government is run by a bunch of incompetent morons ...
    • venvoccd161 6mo ago
      Even NATO generals aren`t talking about Russia invading Germany anytime soon. It`s all about securing NATO territory in the Baltics. Confusing this with "considering a country home and its culture as something worth preserving" when there is no threat to German soil is misleading.
• mcculley 6mo ago
  If the U.S. implements a draft, would we first implement exit visas?
  • 5555624 6mo ago
    If the U.S. implements a draft, will women be required to register? Right now, only men are required to register with the Selected Service when they turn 18. Would Congress amend the Military Selective Service Act?
    • dudul 6mo ago
      If they aren't, all men should just identify as women.
      • deleted 6mo ago
        [deleted]
• i_have_to_speak 6mo ago
  Are homo sapiens the only species that organizes themselves into tribes and work towards the destruction of other tribes of same species?
  • raffael_de 6mo ago
    That is how some people make a lot of money.
  • Simulacra 6mo ago
    Weaver ants
  • rement 6mo ago
    No, Chimpanzees also have tribes and fight over territory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gombe_Chimpanzee_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gombe_Chimpanzee_War
    • i_have_to_speak 6mo ago
      TBF that is an isolated incident, not a distinguishing trait of a species.
      • deleted 6mo ago
        [deleted]
  • delecti 6mo ago
    Not even close. Territorial disputes are incredibly common in nature. Humans are relatively rare in that we're capable of understanding that depriving competitors of resources will eventually lead to their deaths, but that is the ultimate result of winning a territory dispute in nature too.
    • Merethbar 6mo ago
      Ecologist and botanist here. While intraspecific territorial behaviour is a common thing, murder and organised murder is rare. Using biological patterns to explain behaviour in society is called biologism and extremely dangerous because it implies there are natural laws in existence for the behaviour of societies. The laws our societies rely on are constructions based on ideas, not on universal laws which are true everywhere in the universe (even without humans). And there is the main difference to animal territorial behaviour: not an ideology is the driving force behind the territorial behaviour e.g. of a goose but genetics based instinct. Developed over hundreds of thousands of years to be optimally fitted to their niche in an ecosystem (That is what is meant with "suvival of the fittest": To fit in a role within a very complex system of collaboration and dependencies). While instinctive behaviour can be observed in humans too - like the urge to protect small children and cute animals from harm - all of us grow into a culture with its own constructed logic (and paradoxes). To return to the topic of the article: If drafting is a thing or not is a question of the culture you are living in. As long as a society is administering itself by voting for those who decide about the set of rules (laws) for everyone, it is the responsibility of everyone to discuss the rules, ask for adjustments and vote accordingly. As I am a late child my parents were both born in NAZI-Germany. My mum in Düsseldorf (Germany) and my father in Innsbruck (Austria). Their fathers and brothers were drafted to fight the Allies. No matter what their actual believes were. My grandfather was the only child of many to survive the first world war. He was orphined as a toddler. You can imagine that "calling to arms" has no positive reputation in my family. And still I see a point in drafting, if it is about defence. But (and that is a huge BUT): Going to war means to violate existing international laws (remember: human made). Therefore it can't be won (it is not a game, there is no judge or score that defines the rules for winning and loosing). It can only be ended by decision! That's why it is called peace treaty and not win-certificate. As both - peace and war - are not natural laws but human constructs, it is the responsibility of those who (co)decide about the culture they are living in. Most people on earth will agree that breaking peace is a bad thing and the ability to keep peace is a sign of strength. To change the mood of a population to pro-war a lot of time and money has to be invested in lies and propaganda. If our government is weak and struggles to keep peace we can vote for a better one. If your society doesn't allow votes, there is the right to revolt to (re)establish a government that serves everyone (not rules everyone). (It's not a human right per se, but e.g. Germany has the right to revolt in its Grundgesetz/constitution due to what its people learned from the past). As the executive power (police) needs to be counterbalanced, I am strongly pro professional armies and vice versa. Police must be strong enough to protect the government from the army, just in case of an attempt to establish a dictatorship via armed forces. (Power makes corrupt, societies have to be resilient against corruption). But what I find lacking in all those discussions about drafting, (re)arming and warfare, is an honest discussion about peace keeping. Peace keeping needs all of us. It is the true sign of a powerful society. It needs the ability to listen to everyone, no matter how far left or right, to identify the actual needs and find solutions that don't involve the abuse of power. It is easier as it sounds. Most societies are (still) peaceful even when facing many (resource based) challenges. Humans don't like to kill other humans, if they know them. If our societies would agree to include spending for peace keeping into the budget for wars (let's say half of it), I am sure (opinion!) most conflicts wouldn't result in open war. Just imagine what would happen, if the EU would invite the whole russian youth for a summer holiday at host families within all EU countries? Would they return and confirm that "we" are all evil fascists" as the propaganda states? I doupt it. Naive, you say? Take an example from history: After WWII the French and the German decided to end the centuries long Erbfeindschaft (inheritance of being enemies). One of their measures was to establish pupil and student exchange programs. Also cultural "clubs" like brass music groups established exchange programs. It didn't matter that they were not able to speak each others language. Food, drink, music, socialising, playing games and sports together - there are many ways to interact even without a common spoken language. With todays technology even (simple) conversations are possible between "strangers" (or "aliens" as the current wording tends to frame it). Just look at this platform: many people from many countries interact respectfully. Why? Because it is each persons decision to keep peace. So much from me. Sorry if my contribution happend to be a bit long. May peace be with you.
• keysersoze33 6mo ago
  Being 46 (and quite an active 46 year old, just finished a Skitour), am curious why the cutoff for these things tends to be 45?
  • raffael_de 6mo ago
    There has to be some cutoff and I assume it's for law historic reasons, maybe other related laws reference that age. Cynically speaking: the people making those laws probably don't want to be impacted by it. And Germany is effectively a gerontocracy.
  • spwa4 6mo ago
    Let's see ... On December 5, 2025 the German parliament passed a law requiring all men between 18 and 45 years to register "for military service", which everyone should fully understand to mean to register for conscription. Oh and they've added a very political clause: the government can activate conscription WITHOUT a parliament vote. So most political parties who have voted in favor of conscription want to be able to claim "it wasn't us, it was Merz" (ie. CDU). In reality CSU and SPD have voted to effectively conscript German men between 18 and 45. In other words, Germany expects to be in open war in a matter of months to years. Like every country before them they've decided young men are cheaper than actually investing in military equipment (they're investing in military equipment, but they just won't have it in that time period) This probably means that if you can get out, get out, because it's not like being 46 years old will protect you from the impact of that, and yes it's not clear what the timing is going to be, and they're not being very forward about what the reason is for conscription. So that's why 45. Because the existing conscription law (1954 + 2025) allows for conscripting every German male between 18 and 45.
    • AnimalMuppet 6mo ago
      The US has this too. All males register at 18. But the US, for all its militarism, and all its military adventures, has not used the draft since Vietnam. So I would say that Germany sees the need to be in a position where it can respond quickly if they need it. Well, given current events in their neighborhood, I can see their point. In fact, I would say that they are probably at least three years late in doing this.
• randomNumber7 6mo ago
  I kind of predicted this a long time ago. They way germany is currently run they will need to act like the DDR and force their people to stay. Otherwise everyone with good education will leave.
  • raffael_de 6mo ago
    that's a sad fact.
  • raffael_de 6mo ago
    [flagged]
    • AnimalMuppet 6mo ago
      That is not the general policy of HN, nor the general culture here. You may say that you think that should be the culture, but it's not.
• Jamesbeam 6mo ago
  This headline is kind of misleading. First of all, there is no process yet for exactly requesting permission, secondly, the army already said they will not enforce the rule unless the Parliament declares combat readiness is necessary, and lastly, there is no punishment for not asking permission at this point in time. And to be completely honest, if more people made use of registering for the damn ELEFAND emergency contact list, this rule wouldn’t be necessary in the first place. So, men are kind of responsible for this themselves by being lazy. I had to help exfil Germans in Kabul when the US decided to pull out without telling all of their partners in time. Everyone wanted to be rescued, but you have no idea how many German idiots travel to foreign countries, not even taking five minutes to let their own government know how to reach them and where they went in case of an emergency. It’s super fun to drive around Kabul and pick up 55 years old complaining male Germans yelling at me because I told them I transport people, not their fucking luggage. Two even sued me afterwards for leaving their expensive camera equipment behind. A dozen complaints about my behavior. Sometimes it’s really annoying to protect the average citizen. Luckily, I understand that it is an extreme situation for them. Just like some people sue nurses after they broke their ribs reviving their dead ass. It’s a good thing all these idiots now have to ask for permission in the future and likely need to leave the data necessary so it’s known where they are, for how long and how to reach them.
  • raffael_de 6mo ago
    just want to point out you started at this headline is misleading and meandered to agreeing with this being a law now and it was made for a reason and it will be enforced sooner or later. and that's effectively the headline + you think it's a good thing.
    • Jamesbeam 6mo ago
      Thank you, I suspect the _de in your username means you are German or German-speaking? A friend from the US sent the link to this thread to me, asking about it. The source website has no ability to be switched to English language, so all information my friend got was from the headline, which without context was misleading for him. If it was clear people wouldn’t ask German-speaking friends to explain this to them, don’t you think? And if we are really precise, right now German men don’t need to request permission, because there is neither a process nor any paperwork in place to request permission. Without being able to see and understand the context, the headline on its own is misleading in my opinion. Just do an experiment for yourself. Take the original transcript from any trump speech during the Iran war and put it in a German translator. You will understand it’s about the Iran war but you will be surprised how insane those speeches sound if you are not able to understand English and rely on Google Translate to understand the context.
• deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]
• raffael_de 6mo ago
  I'm surprised this news is stalling at 24 points. Everybody has to understand that even if this law isn't impacting you; this is a signal in the noise. Germany is a major part of the industrial military complex together with the US and still the 3rd largest economy in the world after US and China. This is meaningful as it sets course for war in Europe. And for Germans it means soon to be enforced limitations of civil rights. That fits right in with the surveillance crap that is being attempted to roll out in EU (which is effectively headed and controlled by Germany).
  • layer8 6mo ago
    The law was the status quo from the 1950s up to 2011. This is reverting to that era, for good reasons, given the state of the world.
    • raffael_de 6mo ago
      no, it wasn't. old law only when defense situation. new law even when no defense situation (like right now).
      • layer8 6mo ago
        "When defense situation" was only from 2011 on: https://www.buzer.de/gesetz/5521/al28643-0.htm https://www.buzer.de/gesetz/5521/al28643-0.htm. See also the complete version from 2008 here: https://www.bgbl.de/xaver/bgbl/text.xav?SID=&tf=xaver.component.Text_0&tocf=&qmf=&hlf=xaver.component.Hitlist_0&bk=bgbl&start=%2F%2F*[%40node_id%3D%271045885%27]&skin=pdf&tlevel=-2&nohist=1&sinst=7ABBA769 https://www.bgbl.de/xaver/bgbl/text.xav?SID=&tf=xaver.compon...
    • dudefeliciano 6mo ago
      the state of the world in which we keep lunging ourselves into forever wars with no end in sight?
• haukem 6mo ago
  The article 3 of the Wehrpflichtgesetzes says this: > (2) Männliche Personen haben nach Vollendung des 17. Lebensjahres eine Genehmigung des zuständigen Karrierecenters der Bundeswehr einzuholen, wenn sie die Bundesrepublik Deutschland länger als drei Monate verlassen wollen, ohne dass die Voraussetzungen des § 1 Absatz 2 bereits vorliegen. Das Gleiche gilt, wenn sie über einen genehmigten Zeitraum hinaus außerhalb der Bundesrepublik Deutschland verbleiben wollen oder einen nicht genehmigungspflichtigen Aufenthalt außerhalb der Bundesrepublik Deutschland über drei Monate ausdehnen wollen. Die Genehmigung ist für den Zeitraum zu erteilen, in dem die männliche Person für eine Einberufung zum Wehrdienst nicht heransteht. Über diesen Zeitraum hinaus ist sie zu erteilen, soweit die Versagung für die männliche Person eine besondere – im Bereitschafts-, Spannungs- oder Verteidigungsfall eine unzumutbare – Härte bedeuten würde; § 12 Absatz 6 ist entsprechend anzuwenden. Das Bundesministerium der Verteidigung kann Ausnahmen von der Genehmigungspflicht zulassen. See: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/wehrpflg/__3.html https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/wehrpflg/__3.html This was not changed. The article 3 of the Wehrpflichtgesetzes was previously only active in a war or close to war situation (Spannungs- oder Verteidigungsfall). Article 2 said this before: > § 2 Geltung der folgenden Vorschriften > Die §§ 3 bis 53 gelten im Spannungs- oder Verteidigungsfall. See: https://github.com/bundestag/gesetze/blob/master/w/wehrpflg/index.md https://github.com/bundestag/gesetze/blob/master/w/wehrpflg/... Now it says this: > § 2 Anwendung dieses Gesetzes > (1) Die nachfolgenden Vorschriften gelten nach Maßgabe der folgenden Absätze. > (2) Die §§ 3 bis 52 gelten im Spannungs- oder Verteidigungsfall. > (3) Außerhalb des Spannungs- oder Verteidigungsfalls gelten die §§ 3, 8a bis 20b, 25, 32 bis 35, 44 und 45. > (4) Die §§ 15a und 16 sind nur auf Betroffene anzuwenden, die nach dem 31. Dezember 2007 geboren sind. Satz 1 gilt nicht im Spannungs- oder Verteidigungsfall. See: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/wehrpflg/__2.html https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/wehrpflg/__2.html This law changed it: https://www.recht.bund.de/bgbl/1/2025/370/VO https://www.recht.bund.de/bgbl/1/2025/370/VO Is the a up to date git repository with all German law changes? The one I found was last updated 4 years ago.
  • a3w 6mo ago
    Very ancient law, yes. Also: Our law only knowns in this regard only knows either peace and wartime, but no in-between state of state financed propaganda or partisan/guerilla warfare that could already be our current status quo. Propaganda of course is very legitimate in peace times. Digital attacks might always be criminal action or plausibly deniable. Recruiting civilians happens by both e.g. Russian Federation for sabotage and Ukraine for printing missile, drone or mine parts, see drukarmy. But when one group of allies and another state behave the current way, "Spannungsfall" might be reached easily when policy makers declare that has now happened once again after the fall of the eastern block wall.
• cocodill 6mo ago
  Busification, when?
  • bagels 6mo ago
    I guess this is a new word basically meaning conscription by force. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Busification https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Busification
    • ben_w 6mo ago
      > conscription by force Is there any unforced conscription? By definition conscription is compulsory.
      • nick486 6mo ago
        its a question of degree. going to the barracks when you get called up by mail vs getting grabbed off the street, punched in the face and shoved into a bus headed for the training center.
        • ryandrake 6mo ago
          But if you don't do #1, then #2 will happen involuntarily, right? So conscription ultimately = physically forced.
          • jltsiren 6mo ago
            They will probably go to prison instead, like some of my friends did. Giving military training to people who definitely don't want it can be a bad idea for many reasons.
            • samus 6mo ago
              Unmotivated draftees are mostly used as a workforce. Especially in modern warfare, soldiers without significant training are worse than useless, as the wrong action at the wrong time can compromise the stealth and mission of their unit.
• askonomm 6mo ago
  So are you also not allowed to move away or? I find it pretty messed up that your life as a man is literally owned by the government.
  • trvz 6mo ago
    [flagged]
    • aziaziazi 6mo ago
      With all your respect the guidelines also mention this: > Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that". https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  • victorbjorklund 6mo ago
    No, it literally says the law says you must seek permission if you wanna leave for more than 3 months and the govt must always grant you this if not in a war. And if you fail to seek permission nothing happens. You can ignore it without consequence.
    • coldtea 6mo ago
      >And if you fail to seek permission nothing happens. You can ignore it without consequence The consequence is you violated the law, and they can have you at any time, even retroactively, for that. That they don't is merely a detail. If it really has "no consequence" they should remove it.
      • wat10000 6mo ago
        Civilized countries don’t allow retroactively increasing the penalty for breaking a law. Does Germany allow that?
        • 6mo ago
• sergiotapia 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  • deleted 6mo ago
    [deleted]
  • MichaelDickens 6mo ago
    Rather than curtailing women's right to vote, my preferred solution would be to increase men's right to not be conscripted.
    • landl0rd 6mo ago
      You can't have a country that doesn't have conscription in time of war. For example if Russia were to attack which is unlikely but plausible. I don't like conscription at all and it's necessary but still an evil.
      • aziaziazi 6mo ago
        Some countries don’t see sex as a criteria for conscription: good job Norway, Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_and_sexism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_and_sexism
        • landl0rd 6mo ago
          There's a very cold-blooded but good reason why a nation rationally should use men as cannon fodder before women: they are more expendable in terms of reproduction. You need fewer men relative to women. Also, societies with more men than women tend to be unstable and high-crime and whatnot. Societies with more women than men survive a bit better.
          • throwawaypath 6mo ago
            > Also, societies with more men than women tend to be unstable and high-crime and whatnot. Societies with more women than men survive a bit better. Demonstrably false: China and Russia
• legitster 6mo ago
  > While the law requires men to request the permit, the spokesperson clarified, it also obliges the military career center to issue it, if "no specific military service is expected during the period in question.” > "Since military service under current law is based exclusively on voluntary participation, such permissions must generally be granted,” the official added. > When asked, the ministry spokesperson pointed out that "the regulation was already in place during the Cold War and had no practical relevance; in particular, there are no penalties for violating it.”
  • lazide 6mo ago
    Ah, invasive extra paperwork (enforced by criminal penalties, at least in theory) for something they say on the surface they won’t actually need. So very german (hah)
    • nine_k 6mo ago
      I suppose it's only a boring piece of extra paperwork until at some moment the permit stops being automatically issued.
      • baxtr 6mo ago
        You’ve never been to Germany, have you?
        • rvnx 6mo ago
          Guess what, many jews self-reported themselves to the authorities just to follow the process and that led directly to their death. https://www.ushmm.org/online/hsv/source_view.php?SourceId=42011 https://www.ushmm.org/online/hsv/source_view.php?SourceId=42... Of course, this is old times now, but here is the same, there is no benefit to register, and you increase your risk to die. Don't do it.
          • kstenerud 6mo ago
            When your own country is invaded, it changes the calculus.
• coldtea 6mo ago
  "Free world"
• rvz 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  • bigfudge 6mo ago
    This comment doesn't make much sense. Are you implying German taxes are buying Russian oil and so funding the war in Ukraine? If so, that's a very partial reading of what's happened in recent years. Europe went through a huge and very painful transition away from Russian oil and gas. Germany in particular found this very difficult, but AFAICT it's mostly complete and Germany has prioritised renewables. Energy is currently expensive because an orange maniac has started a war that only seems to benefit Russia.
    • 8593376393 6mo ago
      [dead]
• jsiepkes 6mo ago
  So it's a cold war law which is still in place but not being enforced. Same for conscription laws in the Netherlands, which are also still active. They just don't ask anyone to report for conscription. It was even expanded a couple of years before the Ukraine war to also include women.
  • jasonvorhe 6mo ago
    > The new military service law requires all men under 45 to seek approval from the Bundeswehr to leave the country for longer than three months. It also obliges the military career center to issue it. New. Not cold war. This didn't exist before.
    • eigenspace 6mo ago
      It's a re-instatement of a cold war era law that was suspended in 2011.
      • petcat 6mo ago
        Seems like a distinction without a difference to me.
        • dmurray 6mo ago
          It's an important distinction because it prevents the defence of "oh it's just an old law, there are lots of old laws on the books that everyone knows aren't relevant, they can't be tidied up for political reasons". It was suspended for the last 15 years! Surely it was easier to leave it suspended and unsuspending it is a conscious choice.
          • deleted 6mo ago
            [deleted]
      • nine_k 6mo ago
        The point is not when the law originated, but that it's being reinstated.
• einpoklum 6mo ago
  I remember people in Germany who had to go underground to evade the draft, even as recently as the early 2000s. Here's a story from 2002 about how the supreme court there upheld the legality of a military draft: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2002-apr-11-mn-37321-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2002-apr-11-mn-37321... anyway, if you refused to be drafted and did not want to go to jail, you had to more-or-less stop using any government services, rent with roommates, avoid using a credit card etc. until you've reached some age, and then you could emerge again because the duty to serve expires at that certain (not very high) age. It was cuh-razy.
  • ck45 6mo ago
    I'm not sure how credible it is, conscientious objection is literally in the German constitution: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/englisch_gg.html#p0071 https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/englisch_gg.h...
    • itsyonas 6mo ago
      As you said, you can only object if it goes against your conscience, but if you are against it for political reasons (e.g. you don't think its worth it to die for Germany), that's not a valid reason and your objection will be denied. They were also incredibly strict during the Cold War, only easing off a bit afterwards when they wanted a smaller military.
      • ck45 6mo ago
        What's a reason that is politically and not against one's conscience? I assumed that one's political beliefs would also manifest in conscience. The cold war has been over for a very long time. The whole process was reformed in 1984 by removing the mandatory oral hearing. Sources say that acceptance rate was above 90% after 1995. That's not good enough (should be 100%), but not terrible either.
        • itsyonas 6mo ago
• mikrl 6mo ago
  Posted previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47626116 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47626116
  • dang 6mo ago
    Comments moved thither. Thanks! Edit: actually, we'll merge them hither instead of thither since current article is in English. (We have deep respect for other languages, but HN has always been an English-language site - https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20english%20language%20site&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...)
• cookiengineer 6mo ago
  Note that this law still exists because it requires a constitutional change to include women (well, or to be abandoned). A constitutional change of the Grundgesetzbuch requires a 2/3rd majority in the parliament. That almost never happens these days, especially with green/left/social party being not really united anymore in their votes and the conservatives allying themselves with the far right. The last time Germany had that much of a majority, it was under Bundeskanzler Kohl and Schroeder if I remember correctly. So like ~25 years ago. Bundestag seats (from 2002 onwards): 2002 (15): https://www.nls.niedersachsen.de/html/pressemitteilungen1.html https://www.nls.niedersachsen.de/html/pressemitteilungen1.ht... 2005 (16): https://www.nls.niedersachsen.de/html/presse_lwl_bw2005.html https://www.nls.niedersachsen.de/html/presse_lwl_bw2005.html 2008 (17): https://www.bundestag.de/parlament/plenum/sitzverteilung17-259488 https://www.bundestag.de/parlament/plenum/sitzverteilung17-2... 2013 (18): https://www.bundestag.de/webarchiv/textarchiv/2013/sitzvert_18_xl-242304 https://www.bundestag.de/webarchiv/textarchiv/2013/sitzvert_... 2017 (19): https://www.bundestag.de/278118-278118 https://www.bundestag.de/278118-278118 2020 (20): https://web.archive.org/web/20211102103524/https://www.bundestag.de/parlament/plenum/sitzverteilung_20wp https://web.archive.org/web/20211102103524/https://www.bunde... (couldn't find an article on the Bundestag website, got deleted. Web archive version is a little broken) 2025 (21): https://www.bundestag.de/parlament/plenum/sitzverteilung https://www.bundestag.de/parlament/plenum/sitzverteilung
  • randomNumber7 6mo ago
    > The last time Germany had that much of a majority, it was under Bundeskanzler Kohl and Schroeder if I remember correctly. So like ~25 years ago. This is not true. After the last election the old parliament made a deal to change the grundgesetz with 2/3rd majority to allow the new parliament to take more debt.
    • cookiengineer 6mo ago
      Some things align politically, some things don't. Who would have thought?
• sunshine-o 6mo ago
  Those governments are totally inept. For decades they have alienated their own native population, especially men. And now they want to conscript them as their approval ratings are around 15℅. Think about it, Trump approval rating fell sharply but is still at about 40%. Merz is at 15% and most of those 15% are probably boomers in a nursing home. He is probably closer to 0% within the demographic he is trying to conscript. The only war you're gonna get in Europe is a civil war.
  • aleph_minus_one 6mo ago
    > For decades they have alienated their own native population, especially men. And now they want to conscript them as their approval ratings are around 15℅. In particular concerning the military conscription (laws), there exists a cross-generational opposition to these. I just post two famous songs concerning this topic (if you know German): Franz Josef Degenhardt - Befragung eines Kriegsdienstverweigerers [40 Interrogation of a conscientious objector] (1972) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDTtMTcj8X0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDTtMTcj8X0 -- Reinhard Mey - Nein, meine Söhne geb' ich nicht (1986) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0qPsYTBCtQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0qPsYTBCtQ Reinhard Mey & Freunde [Reinhard Mey & friends] - Nein, meine Söhne geb' ich nicht [No, I won't give my sons] (new recording; 2020) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1q-Ga3myTP4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1q-Ga3myTP4 See also https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nein,_meine_S%C3%B6hne_geb%E2%80%99_ich_nicht https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nein,_meine_S%C3%B6hne_geb%E2%...
  • SkiFire13 6mo ago
    > He is probably closer to 0% within the demographic he is trying to conscript. To be fair going against the demographic where you have a 0% approval rate does not lose you much.
    • randomNumber7 6mo ago
      At some point you need to be nice to your children or they'll not help you when you get old and senile.
  • td2 6mo ago
• ph4rsikal 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  • LadyCailin 6mo ago
    Sorry to burst your strawman argument, but I would support the same draft mechanism for women, as it is in Norway. But sure, continue to rail against equality and feminism for no reason.
    • ZunarJ5 6mo ago
      OP: "I'm a victim of the state, so I should be allowed to victimize women." He was about to drop truly groundbreaking theory, I assure you. No one has ever heard that bit before.
    • ph4rsikal 6mo ago
      I am not railing against anyone. I am simply pointing out the fact.
      • LadyCailin 6mo ago
        It’s not a fact though. I support the draft for women. For me, that’s what feminism is. I’m sure you can point out some feminists that are only for drafting men, but that’s not what you stated, you stated a patent falsehood, dressed up as a “fact” so you could dunk on feminism.
    • ck45 6mo ago
      Well, 2 wrongs make one right, don't they?! I wish we'd first fix women's rights and then extend their duties. What the OP does is just egoistically trying to make other groups also suffer.
      • jadamson 6mo ago
        > I wish we'd first fix women's rights and then extend their duties. "We'll get around to it when some arbitrary measure is met, we promise" This is the same thing you're criticising - using one injustice to justify another.
• diath 6mo ago
  Why does it exclude women? War is not just physical strength, but also logistics, operating vehicles, operating drones, nursing, and so on. All tasks that women are well capable of.
  • shin_lao 6mo ago
    Look at the Ukraine war. Who is being drafted against their will?
    • deleted 6mo ago
      [deleted]
    • hulitu 6mo ago
      Everybody. Do you have some statistics ?
      • throw_m239339 6mo ago
        > Everybody. Do you have some statistics ? This is false, overwhelmingly MALES. For a time, males couldn't leave Ukraine, while females could. Those who go to die on the front in all wars are mostly males. Doesn't mean that females aren't casualties as well, they are.
      • Argonaut998 6mo ago
        I haven’t seen any women be bussed or blown up with a drone yet. Are you sure this is the case?
      • dudul 6mo ago
        Always funny to see the most blatant lies be so forcefully put forward. Men were drafted while women were evacuated to the West. There are literal videos of that all over the place.
  • jameslk 6mo ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_expendability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_expendability
• jhrmnn 6mo ago
  It’s interesting to read the discussion here through the lens of obligations vs rights. It would seem the rights are definitely winning.
  • EA-3167 6mo ago
    Unsurprisingly when people here engage in serious politics beyond a desire to enrich themselves, those politics tend to take on a distinctly libertarian bent. I’m not sure what else people expect though, this is a very sheltered group with relatively limited skills outside of specific technical areas. To put it another way this forum skews selfish.
    • wat10000 6mo ago
      I miss the days when hackerdom reliably skewed selfish instead of fascist.
      • surgical_fire 6mo ago
        Those ideas tend to go hand in hand.
        • wat10000 6mo ago
          So I am slowly learning!
      • EA-3167 6mo ago
        I miss the days when such people lacked the power to turn their half-baked fantasies into a broken reality for the rest of us. Alas.
      • deleted 6mo ago
        [deleted]
    • believme1123e4 6mo ago
      [flagged]
  • 6mo ago
• Galanwe 6mo ago
  I don't think there is any moat here, most European countries have these kind of "deprecated" laws, that are not enforced and just stay there because it's too much of a hassle to remove. In France, I think there are still laws forbidding women to wear jeans, and requiring permission of the husband to work. Still in the text of law, but obviously non enforceable.
  • idiotsecant 6mo ago
    Such laws are unenforceable until someone comes along who decides that enforcement would be useful to them.
  • tokai 6mo ago
    US has just as many if not even more. Every state has their own collection of weird laws, like donkeys are not allowed to sleep in bathtubs or dandelions are illegal to grow over a certain height.
  • sva_ 6mo ago
    This is not a deprecated law but rather was changed towards its current form on January 1st of this year
    • FinnKuhn 6mo ago
      The law exists since the 1950s. It was just suspended from 2011 to 2026. The new law just reactivated the old law.
  • TuxSH 6mo ago
    > forbidding women to wear jeans This police ordinance from 1800 was abolished in 2013 > requiring permission of the husband to work Repealed in 1965
• NooneAtAll3 6mo ago
  time to emigrate
  • randomNumber7 6mo ago
    Working on it.
    • huntoa 6mo ago
      Where to?
• orange_joe 6mo ago
  How does feminism survive if this becomes the norm? If young men feel like they're expected to give more to their society it's natural to expect renumeration financial, socially or politically. Nordic countries don't seem to have this problem, but their conscription laws are quite relaxed compared to what the future will likely hold. A declining youth population almost certainly means greater youth repression (higher taxes for pensions, conscription, etc.)
  • dwedge 6mo ago
    Why would this affect feminism? If they want to fight for equal rights to conscription nobody is stopping them, and if they don't nobody is going to force them to. These gotchas don't really have any reflection on reality.
    • orange_joe 6mo ago
      I am wondering if the affected men will demand preferential treatment as a consequence of service. Women currently benefit from disproportionate employment in the social safety net, affirmative action in German government hiring, etc. I would imagine that this would be essentially offensive to the men who are required to stay in the country, or face (potential future) conscription. I suspect the demands of European governments will increase as countries continue to age.
      • randomNumber7 6mo ago
        > I am wondering if the affected men will demand preferential treatment as a consequence of service. I'm more thinking about leaving asap.
    • missedthecue 6mo ago
      I would define feminism as the belief that on balance and in aggregate, there is a difference in the fairness that society accords to the genders and it's in favor of men. The risk to feminism would be that this becomes so blatantly and obviously not true that no one can take it seriously. I don't think the continued draft of men would impact this because it's not a change to the status quo, and it isn't changing opinion in Ukraine.
• machinekob 6mo ago
  This is only for citizen not refugees/immigrants so both MEA and NA folks can chill.
  • huggerl88 6mo ago
    [flagged]
  • mothballed 6mo ago
    Yes the US has a more insidious "hidden" law that I'm amazed Trump has not used to his advantage. It's a felony for the younger illegal immigrants males who are eligible to not register for the draft (most visa and legally visa exempt tourists are exempt, but the exemption falls off if you fall out of status). Almost none of them do, meaning almost all undocumented military-age-males are actively committing a serious crime.
    • tasuki 6mo ago
      It's either generousness or incompetence.
  • ihsw 6mo ago
    Why aren't refugees/immigrants conscripted over citizens?
    • AdrianB1 6mo ago
      Because not only that the immigrants have no allegiance to Germany, most have different culture and sometimes incompatible values. I grew up in the Middle East and I can tell that cultural differences and values were more smooth and compatible than what I saw in Germany. Conscription requires a degree of trust in the people you give guns to and expect to fight on your side in case it is needed, that is mostly not true with immigrants in all times and all countries.
      • ndarray 6mo ago
        Ten years of "refugees welcome" to fighting age men who we don't trust won't run amok when we go to war with a third party. Very cool.
• cynicalsecurity 6mo ago
  It's unenforceable in the EU that has no borders.
  • Xylakant 6mo ago
    That doesn’t mean it’s unenforceable. You don’t need a permit to leave Germany to any country as long as your planned stay is shorter than 3 month. The only way this could be enforced is by checking if people are in country, that is in case of drafting them. The paragraph essentially ensures that any person that gets drafted needs to present themselves in person within 3 month of the draft notice.
  • a3w 6mo ago
    EU law overrides and breaks German law. Germany is d'accord with that. So if german consitution sayed, starting in cold war era, what this law states, then the newer joining into EU made a new law, bringing freizügigkeit ("feedom of movement") to superseed even our Grundgesetz.
    • selfmodruntime 6mo ago
      EU members have a well documented history of ignoring EU law.
• markus_zhang 6mo ago
  Question for German friends: What do you think about the production level of military equipment? If Russia does move (which I think is unlikely in the near future), how many days does the ammo last?
  • stephbook 6mo ago
    Nice try!
    • a3w 6mo ago
      The meme goes "Nice try, Ivan"
  • TheOtherHobbes 6mo ago
    NATO has days/weeks of ammunition, so it's woefully under-resourced. NATO doctrine is basically air superiority against any invading force, with the ability to wreak destruction far behind the front lines. Conveniently the Iran war has depleted stockpiles of almost everything. The reality is NATO is vulnerable on two fronts. The first is that NATO has no defences against the kind of drone and missile waves Russia has been using against Ukraine. A surprise attack could easily take out a large part of NATO's air superiority and do significant damage to arms factories. The second is more serious - capture of the independent nuclear deterrent. The US is clearly giving up on defending Europe, the UK's deterrent is barely functional, and only France has a truly independent deterrent. Russia has spent a lot of time and money trying to get a puppet government elected on France, along the lines of the governments in Hungary, Slovakia, and the US. If France stops being a deterrent Russia would be able to nuke Brussels - and perhaps a few other capitals to make the point - and likely force immediate surrender. The question is really whether Russia can hold on until the French elections next year.
    • zilian 6mo ago
      This reads like Russian propaganda. NATO's EU forces have not used any ammo in the Iran war as they are not a belligerant. Russia's nuclear deterrent has to prove to be still in working condition. There is no guarantee Le Pen would win in 2027 and the chain of command would allow that to happen
• dmitrygr 6mo ago
  EU Charter of Fundamental Rights quoth: Article 20 Everyone is equal before the law. Article 21 1. Any discrimination based on any ground such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation shall be prohibited.
• almokhtar 6mo ago
  [flagged]
• renewiltord 6mo ago
  > When asked, the ministry spokesperson pointed out that "the regulation was already in place during the Cold War and had no practical relevance; in particular, there are no penalties for violating it.” The famed German rule-following in action. This kind of routine violation of regulation is what led to Dieselgate. Social norms in places like this rarely support rule of law. There's a reason the EPA was the one which blew this wide open. Local regulators follow these norms because that's what German cultural norms are.
  • SoftTalker 6mo ago
    The EPA was able to do this because they made up some new numbers and set an arbitrary deadline. The same cars the year before were fine. The EPA altered the deal and then exacted punishment.
• 8593376393 6mo ago
  [dead]
• lokar 6mo ago
  A tangent, but I’m interested (as an American) what is the German attitude towards laws that have no enforcement or penalty? Do most people feel an obligation to observe them? Is there any social cost for disregarding them?
  • juujian 6mo ago
    IIRC there is actually a practice of nullifying laws that cannot be enforced (Vollzugsdefizit). One example I remember is that the enforcement of minor drug possession charges was declared unconstitutional because that law was only selectively enforced.
  • braabe 6mo ago
    I think it varies. I suspect in most common cases the lack of enforcement results from the rest of society not having an appetite to punish it. No harm done, no need to punish. I believe jaywalking (or crossing a red light as a pedestrian) is prohibited, but you would have to do it in front of a really motivated cop (or cause an accident) to actually get a ticket for it. It is common and no one really cares - but if you were to do it in front of children or a school you will probably get disapproving looks or a somewhat stern talking to from others around you. I think the image of the "order-loving german" is a bit of a stereotype. Some people overdo it (Calling the police for noise harassment if you still mow your lawn at 20:01), but they are generally not popular with their neighbors (or the police...)
    • lokar 6mo ago
      Any idea how the attitude compares to the Swiss?
    • mr_toad 6mo ago
      Jaywalking is illegal is many jurisdictions, partly for pedestrians own safety, but also partly to shift the blame if a pedestrian is involved in an accident. So it’s mostly seen as a crime where people only hurt themselves.
      • 6mo ago
• bilsbie 6mo ago
  “ Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.” - Universal Declaration of Human Rights https://www.ohchr.org/en/human-rights/universal-declaration/translations/english https://www.ohchr.org/en/human-rights/universal-declaration/...
  • qayxc 6mo ago
    And this regulation violates this how exactly?
    • Lucasoato 6mo ago
      Because if you need a written confirmation that may conditionally not be given, you don’t actually have the right.
      • qayxc 6mo ago
        First of all you don't need it. Secondly, the regulation even states that the right is granted automatically anyway. Technically, the rule had been in place for the past 45+ years anyway - even when there was mandatory military service! - so it doesn't make any practical difference.
        • rustyhancock 6mo ago
          Then they should remove the law this weekend. Apparently it is bureaucracy without purpose after all?
          • 1over137 6mo ago
            It has a purpose: to be ready when/if needed.
          • qayxc 6mo ago
            > Apparently it is bureaucracy without purpose after all? No it's not without purpose at all. The purpose is to know who could be drafted in a timely manner should the need arise. There's currently 2 major wars - sorry "special military operations" - happening, one of which in Europe. A certain government involved in one of these simultaneously calls for allies to assist while at the same time openly questioning half a century of military alliances. So maybe this helps to understand why regulations like this make sense - even for people who never lived through a time when there was mandatory military service and take their own security for granted.
• bilsbie 6mo ago
  [flagged]
• logicchains 6mo ago
  Welcome to Dubai, German habibis, you can join all the Russians fleeing their draft here. Still a lot less likely to get hit by a drone here than to die when fighting on the frontlines in Europe.
  • lifestyleguru 6mo ago
    We are indeed evolving into a situation where Islamic monarchies not only sound reasonable but start to look like a viable option.
    • dingi 6mo ago
      Islamic societies could be the only ones that will be left standing after all these nonsense we see in the west.
      • randomNumber7 6mo ago
        I would bet my money on asian societies.
        • asksomeoneelse 6mo ago
          I don't know. A lot of countries in East Asia seem to struggle demographically just as much as Western countries do, if not more. But at least it seems they didn't go for the easy solutions that is mass immigration, so hopefully their children's "seats" won't be taken when they finally wake up. On the other hand, as someone living in Central Europe, it's obvious our society is heading towards a radical change. I don't know what will happen, but I don't recall ever reading about a indigenous population becoming a minority being a good thing for them.
          • randomNumber7 6mo ago
            I think its more about a rotten ideology and mass migration is only a symptom. Also it could make sense if you would actually care about taking people that are educated and willing to work.
• grigio 6mo ago
  [flagged]
• deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]
• SenHeng 6mo ago
  Singapore has a similar requirement called an Exit Permit. It may have changed, I don’t really know or care anymore. But the conscription was a huge driver for me to emigrate as soon as I could. I left the country 2 weeks after finishing my military service.
• KellyCriterion 6mo ago
  for the risk of getting downvoted: why only locals, but no migrants?
  • itsyonas 6mo ago
    ? This includes all male citizens aged 18 - 45.
    • nubg 6mo ago
      It doesn't, only German citizens
      • a3w 6mo ago
        does citizen and German not mean the same thing? Are EU citizens living permanently in germany even considered to have a duty to either militarily or in civil service serve in war times?
        • est31 6mo ago
          Not a lawyer but the German constitution, Article 12a, speaks of men above 18, not of citizens, or even residents of Germany. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/englisch_gg.html#p0069 https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/englisch_gg.h... So that article can in theory be used to conscript any man, citizen or not, living in Germany or not. The Wehrpflichtgesetz, which is a simple law and requires just the 50% Bundestag majority to have it changed, refines this very wide constitutional power in article 1, to require men who hold German citizenship above 18. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/wehrpflg/BJNR006510956.html#BJNR006510956BJNG000108310 https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/wehrpflg/BJNR006510956.ht... Article 3 refines it even further to folks below 45 or 60, depending on the severity of the situation. But yes, in theory it can be changed to include any non-German citizen man, people aged 80, living inside of Germany since a while or never having been to Germany ever, or just random men who happen to change flights at FRA.
      • itsyonas 6mo ago
• Ms-J 6mo ago
  Owned like a slave to the government.
• nickdothutton 6mo ago
  "Gradually, then suddenly", as someone once said.
• piloto_ciego 6mo ago
  The older I get the more I can't stand "countries" as a concept. Especially this notion that somehow countries own their citizens. It's quite gross to me... Countries do not own their citizens, citizens own their countries. Countries are a technology - albeit an old and sometimes useful technology, but a technology. This is like an iPhone requiring your permission to leave it on the counter for a day. This idea that you're not allowed to travel without a permit is a perverse inversion of reality. People are not property and the idea that a "country" can feed human beings into one meat-grinder or another at will in order to preserve itself is the very thing that the AI safety people are panicked about. It's the paperclip maximizer, but instead of making paperclips it tries to grow and expand it's influence into all aspects of the human experience. Increasingly this disgusts me at a cellular level.
  • randomNumber7 6mo ago
    If you don't fight for your rights you lose them.
    • piloto_ciego 6mo ago
      Quite shocking to see the downvotes I'm getting - and you're right, I have been fighting for them, but I am only one person. But it definitely seems like most people would much rather do what they were told than risk anything. It distresses me a bit.
      • deleted 6mo ago
        [deleted]
    • deleted 6mo ago
      [deleted]
• Animats 6mo ago
  Next step in Germany - from mid-2027, a fitness test for 18 year olds.
• dingi 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  • cteiosanu 6mo ago
    Manoshpere much ?
    • asksomeoneelse 6mo ago
      If society enforces men's roles using the law and you're fine with it, don't come complaining when it does the same for women.
    • AlexeyBelov 6mo ago
      The whole comment section here makes me sad. Rightoid paradise very similar to Youtube comments. I wonder when HN starts openly talking about "joos", "big noses" and "getting rid of certain minorities".
  • samus 6mo ago
    > Especially since women have largely abandoned their traditional duties and still kinda expect men to hold their end of the bargain. As far as I see, women still birth and raise children and take care of most of the household; they just also work in the addition. Don't know what you're talking about.
    • dingi 6mo ago
      Birth rates among liberal women in almost all developed societies suggest otherwise. Women are doing double duty and doing both badly. Women are relatively and absolutely less happier than they were 50 years ago. So I'm having hard time believing that this new norm is a win for anyone.
      • samus 6mo ago
        The reality is that most women are simply not interested in raising more than two children per person. If this is undesirable from a societal perspective then they either need to be forced (which I hope you're not seriously suggesting) or the incentives to raise more children need to be increased (atm there are none except personal satisfaction) and the downsides need to be mitigated (without a stable career, women are wholly dependent on their spouse's income).
• dogemaster2026 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  • j-pb 6mo ago
    As a German who is very happy with their Gambian apprentice, may I kindly ask you to go fuck yourself.
    • dogemaster2026 6mo ago
      Do you get this unhinged when you don’t know the facts? Or you just don’t like them?
• throwdddd 6mo ago
  Men are expected to die for their countries that treat them as trash.
  • throwawaypath 6mo ago
    [flagged]
• snovymgodym 6mo ago
  Modern Germany will collapse in the face of any war that would justify conscription, so it's all a moot point anyway. The country is already in a slow burning crisis due to the political and economic results of its demography, and a war coming to its own soil will send the walls tumbling down.
  • mrob 6mo ago
    No war justifies slavery ("conscription").
  • sunshine-o 6mo ago
    Yes, my guess is most of western Europe would collapse after one or two weeks without electricity. I have seen people acting really erratically just after a few hours without electrity and internet. Most people are so clueless they would quickly put their home on fire because they do not know how to safely use candles. Also, just looking at what would happen to a large part of the population once they would run out of meds is terrifying. Heart medications, SSRI, anti psychotics. etc. There is not gonna be a war in Europe like how WWI and II was described to us. It is gonna be far less heroic.
• tsoukase 6mo ago
  I still cannot understand why and what we are fighting for. Setting aside the wars of the previous decades, Russia was a long term ally with Ukraine, much like the USA and Canada and then out of nowhere they are in a "soft war". Also, after 50 years of the Islamic regime in Iran, we should engage in another soft war, again because of ill defined reasons. The soft is in contrast to regular war which locks down the whole society and has innumerous deaths and pain. I still cannot.
  • throw-the-towel 6mo ago
    I cannot agree that Russia and Ukraine were ever long term allies. It was, at best, more like an uneasy co-existence.
  • id00 6mo ago
    Russia, and especially Putin (over the last 26 years), never considered Ukraine an ally but rather a puppet and something that must be in their direct influence/control. Their relationship can’t be compared to the one the US and Canada had.
    • td2 6mo ago
      But it can be compared to the relation us and canada currently have lol
  • PuppetSoup 6mo ago
    What is this propaganda. > Russia was a long term ally with Ukraine, much like the USA and Canada and then out of nowhere they are in a "soft war" First off the history between Ukraine and Russia is nothing like between USA and Canada. Russia killed millions of Ukrainians in 30's by starvation, known as "Holodomor". Secondly Ukraine voted for independence immediately after Soviet Union collapsed. Most egregious claim is the "soft war" one. Russia attacked to Ukraine in 2014 and started full scale war in 2022 that has led to close to two million casualties. What the f*ck is "hard war" if this is "soft war"?
    • randomengineer1 6mo ago
• sva_ 6mo ago
  The crazy thing to me is also that they slipped it into the law on January 1st, and our quality journalism (such as OP DW), for which we are forced to pay monthly fees, only reports about it now - and I'm fairly sure they didn't break the story, they caught onto it pretty late. Almost like by design. Oh yeah and the obvious discrimination. If you change your gender on paper now you probably won't be affected, but you will be affected if you change it short-term. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/sbgg/__9.html https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/sbgg/__9.html
  • realityking 6mo ago
    Deutsche Welle is not funded by the “Rudfunkbeitrag” but part of the federal budgetz
    • deleted 6mo ago
      [deleted]
• neilwilson 6mo ago
  Other than moving within the rest of the EU under Article 21 EU law trumps German law. In US terms such a requirement is not “constitutional”.
  • JumpCrisscross 6mo ago
    > In US terms such a requirement is not “constitutional” Then what is the selective service?
    • MarsIronPI 6mo ago
      As an American, I fail to see how it is constitutional. See my other comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47653207 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47653207
• nicbou 6mo ago
  I have been living in Germany for 11 years and qualify for citizenship. This is exactly the kind of thing that has stopped me. If this country goes to war, I'm out. My presence here has always been transactional when it benefited Germany. It will stay transactional when it benefits me.
  • shard972 6mo ago
    [dead]
  • croes 6mo ago
    There is a difference between military service and going to war. Only volunteers can be send outside Germany, everyone else stays in Germany for defense
  • localuser13 6mo ago
    >My presence here has always been transactional when it benefited Germany. It will stay transactional when it benefits me. Because you're not a citizen. When you become a citizen you get more rights, but also some duties. Would you agree? I don't know your exact situation and I may assume things that are not true here.
    • nicbou 6mo ago
      I agree with that, so I choose not to become a citizen.
• miki123211 6mo ago
  Imagine replacing "men" with "women" in this article. Oh the uproar.
• guerrilla 6mo ago
  Nobody's going to bring up the sexism? I thought feminism was for equality. Why then no complains of not having equal responsibility here? Just like when Ukraine did this, nobody cared. No complaints in the media at all. They always want more women in the offices too, never in the coal mines.
  • raffael_de 6mo ago
    Also Curds and Israelis prove that women can very well be full on soldiers.
    • guerrilla 6mo ago
      Kurds* yes and Sweden as well. I agree, it's not like people are running around swinging broadswords, maces and war axes anymore. Anyone without a disability can run and pull a trigger or do all those technical jobs.
      • csa 6mo ago
        > Anyone without a disability can run and pull a trigger This is very much untrue in terms of being a soldier in a high-functioning military. Technically, you’re not wrong (at least for lighter weapons). That said, there are many more physically demanding things that are involved in doing infantry things (which is what you’re describing) other than running and pulling a trigger (and ideally hitting the target). > or do all those technical jobs. Depends on the job, but much more likely. The vast majority of the jobs in the military are not infantry or infantry-type jobs, so I can see a lot more scope for drafted women who aren’t cut out for infantry doing these things.
        • guerrilla 6mo ago
          > The vast majority of the jobs in the military are not infantry or infantry-type jobs Exactly.
      • MarsIronPI 6mo ago
        Technical jobs yes. Infantry still requires a lot of physical strength. I'd welcome anyone who has that strength to be in the infantry, but anyone who can't, male or female, should not be in the infantry, or any job that might require dragging heavy people or heavy equipment.
• consumer451 6mo ago
  As the protection and control of post-WWII Pax Americana falls, we will all realize how much of our peace and prosperity had previously relied upon Pax Americana. Buckle tf up.
  • consumer451 6mo ago
    Just to be clear, "Western Europe/Social Democracy" now faces a two-front battle. On one side, we have X/Twitter far-right state media from the USA, and on the other, we have Telegram far-right from Moscow. Our youngest are effed, while watching the CCP's TikTok, and we choose to do nothing about it. Meanwhile: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqohApD6Ng8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqohApD6Ng8
    • wesammikhail 6mo ago
      [flagged]
      • consumer451 6mo ago
        [flagged]
        • wesammikhail 6mo ago
          [flagged]
          • consumer451 6mo ago
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0wIgeAqLiA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0wIgeAqLiA Turn CC=on for those in the USA/EU. Our Russian brothers and sisters want to be part of EU instead of the Kremlin, fight me. What is super fucked up is that while Russian education is top-notch, see Google.com founders, meanwhile, Russia is so fucked up that they cannot take advantage of any of this. Buckle tf up Europe.
            • deleted 6mo ago
• huntoa 6mo ago
  The number of applications to change the gender in one's passport will grow with each incident or legislation that makes the draft more likely since the constitution states that only citizens designated 'male' in their passports are to be drafted. Is there a downside to changing it to 'divers' or 'keine Angabe' (not specified)? Here's the main reason I think most people are going to try to avoid a draft. Politicians have destroyed Germany and its future while they enriched themselves and their rich friends, for example [1]. They have lured in a flood of migrants against the will of many natives. They have been transferring wealth of the natives to the migrants by printing money to give to the migrants, thereby generating inflation while overloading all kinds of services. Even medium-sized cities in the east of Germany are infested with unwanted, culturally incompatible, sketchy male immigrants loitering around in groups, making people feel unsafe in their own cities. These people are disproportionately more responsible for violent crime, such as knife attacks or gang rape. You could halve gang rape by throwing out certain migrant groups. Yet nothing effective has been done by the government. Recently, there was a case in a youth club in the notoriously high-immigrant Berlin district Neukölln, where a 16-year-old girl said she was raped by a Muslim male. She said this was video recorded and used by a group of boys to extort her. The Jugendamt (child protective services) was informed, which is reported to have refused to file a charge with the police "because it marginalizes the perpetrator group" and "the Muslim boys are already under enough police scrutiny". Who wants to fight for that? There is little patriotism. The rich live lavishly off their Rheinmetall stocks, many refugees live very well from welfare and child benefits, and the immigrant criminals live off their ill-gotten gains without effective prosecution or punishment. None of those will be drafted; only the ordinary German will. Many of them are furious; the others are misinformed or uninformed. If the politicians try to draft the really angry people, the angry people might decide to pay them a visit instead. [1] (in German) https://correctiv.org/thema/aktuelles/das-spahn-netzwerk/ https://correctiv.org/thema/aktuelles/das-spahn-netzwerk/
• SZJX 6mo ago
  I looked through some related recent discussions, interestingly somebody[1] pointed out that this has long been the case in some countries where the military service is mandatory, such as Switzerland (even though the threshold of continuous absence for applying for such a "military vacation" is longer, 1 year in the Swiss case): https://www.armee.ch/de/militaerdienst-urlaub https://www.armee.ch/de/militaerdienst-urlaub [1] https://old.reddit.com/r/luftablassen/comments/1s33z9v/wtf_genehmigung_f%C3%BCr_ausreise_als_mann_n%C3%B6tig/occruhh/ https://old.reddit.com/r/luftablassen/comments/1s33z9v/wtf_g...
• pojzon 6mo ago
  Its funny most ppl dont see the cycle: Fashism -> War -> Democracy —> Fashism -> War -> Democracy Change democracy to other stable situation and we look at last few thousend years of humans on Earth. Rulling caste uses it the same way over and over. Profiting on each change. TBH with current tech advancements it may be the moment we really should give out freedom of our choice to a smarter being like AGI. Humans are too stupid to decide about ourselves.
• deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]
• throwawaypath 6mo ago
  "Come die in a war to protect the borders that no one respects, conserve a culture you can't be proud of, only to be replaced by a MENA migrant after you perish."