this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2024
636 points (95.4% liked)

World News

32321 readers
786 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Ok, but barring corner cases...

Edit - and arguably it's still not a "good" idea - that's something you do because you feel there's no other choice at that point. It solves the short term problem, doesn't strike me as healthy for the populace in a long term way.

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

It is healthy for the populace in the sense that only 26 million people die instead of the vast majority of a population of 150 million, which would have happened without conscription.

It is justified when the war is an existential threat to the people of an area, not of the state ruling the area.

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I don't disagree at all, just saying it's not a way to keep your standing army populated that I can agree with. I don't think this is at odds with your clarification, but if I'm missing your point please don't hesitate to reel me in.