Summary
Germany’s government approved a draft law requiring young men to indicate their willingness to serve in the military, aiming to increase military participation without reintroducing conscription.
The survey will target around 300,000 18-year-old males in 2024, with young women given the option to participate. This initiative follows years of recruitment challenges since Germany ended compulsory service in 2011.
With a growing focus on defense in response to Russian aggression, Germany seeks to increase its military personnel from 180,000 to 203,000 by 2030.
Yo momma.
If they’ll get me out of the US, I’ll fight.
I don’t think Germany is really an option, since the thing being discussed in this article (a) is just a proposal and (b) has nothing to do with foreigners anyway.
However, if you’re serious, what is a thing is the French Foreign Legion.
Germany also has a right-wing problem. One is the frying pan, the other the fire. Not sure which is which, but it wouldn’t be a great change.
Yes, Germany has a right-wing problem, but according to this poll, 74% would have voted for Harris and 11% for Trump.
Polls don’t work any more.
Also we don’t have a FPTP system, which might be a good thing as well (don’t @ me about Erststimme, I know, but it doesn’t change the overall point).
That’s just because they live in the 21st century.
Better food and better beer but that’s a fair point.
I’d take a burger or some fried chicken over German food anytime.
They just want to kill people, but also hate America.
I hope they do this on my country so I can draw a big fat juicy cock on the survey
And they have yet not arrived in the 20th(!) century. They are sending this form only to young men, not women.
The draft is actually harsher for women than for men: Men can refuse service at arms, women can’t refuse medical service.
EDIT: Don’t believe me? Article 12a GG, Paragraph 4. There are no alternate service provisions for refusing medical service.
Any person who, on grounds of conscience, refuses to render military service involving the use of arms may be required to perform alternative service.
So men can refuse service at arms, but they can’t refuse service, so how is that better ? Either way you’re still drafted into war. Possibly into medical service as well. So it’s not harsher, it’s the same or worse, because you could be drafted to maintenance near the front lines, whereas medical is usually a ways back. Or as a woman you could volunteer to maintenance, logistics or recruitment before being drafted, then you’re not forced into medical. You’re likely not even put near the front lines as a woman.
So your statement that it is harsher on women is not correct. It’s actually quite insensitive for the men who die in the front lines for the country.
because you could be drafted to maintenance near the front lines,
And field hospitals can’t be near front lines? If with “near the front” you mean “you’re running around with a sidearm” then that’s a combat role, combat mechanic isn’t a non-combat role, the actual maintenance is just as far back as hospitals are.
So your statement that it is harsher on women is not correct.
You cannot interpret “harsher” freely, without taking account what I called harsher, after the colon: Women who don’t have the stomach to go into the medical field don’t have an out, legally speaking. While the law says “Not all men are fighters”, it is saying “all women are nurses”. You see the difference in essentialism there, don’t you?
