The Law Conscription/National Service

Remove this Banner Ad

eaglespremiers

eaglespremiers

BigFooty Forger
Fallout Fan Veteran 10k Posts
Jun 24, 2009
23,770
22,778
In your dreams
AFL Club
West Coast
An article today on News.com.au suggested that in the event of an imminent war conscription may be utilised to bolster defence numbers.
Without resorting to fearmongering, in what circumstances, if any, would you support or accept the reintroduction of conscription?
Given the connected social media world we live in at the start of 2024 would it even be possible to implement conscription at any meaningful level in Australia? If so, what do you think would be some of the drawbacks of utilising conscription that would need to be overcome?
Is there a way to encourage substantially more voluntary service to bolster numbers in the defence force?

Given the possibility of geopolitical conflict Australia has obviously been taking a number of steps to better defend itself (including the recent purchasing of 72 F35 fighters, the AUKUS pact and provision of nuclear-powered submarines and the implementation of the recommendations in the Defence Strategic Review to name a few). Are there are alternatives to conscription to enable Australia to be better prepared for future conflicts in the region (with the priority being to defend our borders)?

Interested in your thoughts.
 
Last edited:
eaglespremiers said:
An article today on News.com.au suggested that in the event of an imminent war conscription may be utilised to bolster defence numbers.
Without resorting to fearmongering, in what circumstances, if any, would you support or accept the reintroduction of conscription?
Given the connected social media world we live in at the start of 2024 would it even be possible to implement conscription at any meaningful level in Australia? If so, what do you think would be some of the drawbacks of utilising conscription that would need to be overcome?
Is there a way to encourage substantially more voluntary service to bolster numbers in the defence force?

Given the possibility of geopolitical conflict Australia has obviously been taking a number of steps to better defend itself (including the recent purchasing of 72 F35 fighters, the AUKUS pact and provision of nuclear-powered submarines and the implementation of the recommendations in the Defence Strategic Review to name a few). Are there are alternatives to conscription to enable Australia to be better prepared for future conflicts in the region (with the priority being to defend our borders)?

Interested in your thoughts.
Click to expand...
A while ago, I remember reading something from someone reviewing the role of conscripts in conflicts throughout history, saying that career soldiers do not want them because you cannot guarantee they'll hold a line or have your back. They don't want to be there in the same way as a career soldier is, someone who chose to do it; their motivation is personal survival rather than whatever they were sent to war to do.

As a consequence, if you spend time training them some percentage of them won't want to learn to shoot. Some of them will never fire a shot at an enemy, because throughout history 75 percent of soldiers do not engage with the enemy; do you really want the person next to you in that situation to be a person who didn't listen in basic because they didn't want to be there? They'll know how to take cover, use your supplies and eat your food when you need to ration.

You'd have to talk to someone else about methods of recruiting more soldiers. Don't think conscription's the answer, and even if it was the only way I don't know how effective it'd be. There're stories of WW1-2 of mass surrenders of conscripted soldiers.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

eaglespremiers said:
An article today on News.com.au suggested that in the event of an imminent war conscription may be utilised to bolster defence numbers.
Without resorting to fearmongering, in what circumstances, if any, would you support or accept the reintroduction of conscription?
Given the connected social media world we live in at the start of 2024 would it even be possible to implement conscription at any meaningful level in Australia? If so, what do you think would be some of the drawbacks of utilising conscription that would need to be overcome?
Is there a way to encourage substantially more voluntary service to bolster numbers in the defence force?

Given the possibility of geopolitical conflict Australia has obviously been taking a number of steps to better defend itself (including the recent purchasing of 72 F35 fighters, the AUKUS pact and provision of nuclear-powered submarines and the implementation of the recommendations in the Defence Strategic Review to name a few). Are there are alternatives to conscription to enable Australia to be better prepared for future conflicts in the region (with the priority being to defend our borders)?

Interested in your thoughts.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't think conscription makes any sense whatsoever unless we were in a situation like Ukraine is. And how another country would be able to mobilise, ship, and land sufficient equipment and manpower to enable that I don't know.

Conscripting people to send them off overseas to fight in a war, especially with the level of weaponry available now? Folly.
 
owen87 said:
Older right wingers seem to think military service would fix those young people voting for the left.
Click to expand...
I think people struggling to find work/young people/long term unemployed could benefit from joining the reserves or something for skills/discipline/routine etc but this is more than a few levels too far...

I don't think I know anyone who would agree to conscription. I'd sooner flee the country!
 
burge13 said:
I think people struggling to find work/young people/long term unemployed could benefit from joining the reserves or something for skills/discipline/routine etc but this is more than a few levels too far...

I don't think I know anyone who would agree to conscription. I'd sooner flee the country!
Click to expand...

I've worked with people who've gone off and spent a spent in the military and it's done them good, but also plenty ended up with PTSD or Depression coming out so it's not all positives.
 
owen87 said:
I've worked with people who've gone off and spent a spent in the military and it's done them good, but also plenty ended up with PTSD or Depression coming out so it's not all positives.
Click to expand...
Agree, far from all positives. None of my mates have PTSD but almost all have injuries affecting them after they've left

I think joining the reserves for additional skills when on the dole for example would have more positives than negatives but that's far removed from what is proposed in the article.
 
owen87 said:
Older right wingers seem to think military service would fix those young people voting for the left.
Click to expand...

The point of the article wasn't conscription used as a weapon to send to overseas conflicts.

It was as a way to bolster national security for a home defence which may be required in the next decade/s. In the same way it's implemented in Israel and Sth Korea. It's certainly the most heightened risk of the last 70 years in that sense.

I'm yet to read an alternative to "resolve things diplomatically" by the naive far left.

What if we are required to actually defend the mainland ourselves, for the first time in our history?

This country has one of the highest standards of living in the world, people love to complain about things, the country has an abundance of natural resources, however, our military is incredibly under resourced in comparison to just about every federally funded industry at the moment, to defend any of the countries interests if required.

Ukraine is a terrible comparison, we aren't anywhere near as well prepared as Ukraine was for a major conflict.
 
Sphynx said:
The point of the article wasn't conscription used as a weapon to send to overseas conflicts.

It was as a way to bolster national security for a home defence which may be required in the next decade/s. In the same way it's implemented in Israel and Sth Korea. It's certainly the most heightened risk of the last 70 years in that sense.

I'm yet to read an alternative to "resolve things diplomatically" by the naive far left.

What if we are required to actually defend the mainland ourselves, for the first time in our history?

This country has one of the highest standards of living in the world, people love to complain about things, the country has an abundance of natural resources, however, our military is incredibly under resourced in comparison to just about every federally funded industry at the moment, to defend any of the countries interests if required.

Ukraine is a terrible comparison, we aren't anywhere near as well prepared as Ukraine was for a major conflict.
Click to expand...

Unlike most countries we’re a highly geographically isolated island.

There’s no chance of just rolling some tanks over the border like in Ukraine.
 
owen87 said:
Unlike most countries we’re a highly geographically isolated island.

There’s no chance of just rolling some tanks over the border like in Ukraine.
Click to expand...

Yep, it’s going to come from sea.

Luckily we have a world class fully manned navy, with cutting edge ships, anti ship missiles and long range missile batteries to protect that island.…..uh oh…
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Sphynx said:
The point of the article wasn't conscription used as a weapon to send to overseas conflicts.

It was as a way to bolster national security for a home defence which may be required in the next decade/s. In the same way it's implemented in Israel and Sth Korea. It's certainly the most heightened risk of the last 70 years in that sense.

I'm yet to read an alternative to "resolve things diplomatically" by the naive far left.

What if we are required to actually defend the mainland ourselves, for the first time in our history?

This country has one of the highest standards of living in the world, people love to complain about things, the country has an abundance of natural resources, however, our military is incredibly under resourced in comparison to just about every federally funded industry at the moment, to defend any of the countries interests if required.

Ukraine is a terrible comparison, we aren't anywhere near as well prepared as Ukraine was for a major conflict.
Click to expand...
Blessed with (almost)no oil though, in the great irony of geopolitics
 
Conscription would only be peacefully accepted by the population if the home island is attacked or under attack or threatened or the home island army is strictly for deployment within the island.

They've tried holding votes to allow that home guard to be deployed overseas, failed. They tried a vote to have that guard deployed to assist our allies, failed.

It's really the only just position in a war, defending the ground under the homes of your family and community.

I do not think society will stomach the reality of training and equipping all able bodied and of mind men under forty with semi automatic rifles. I think there will be a scare campaign against it, because they don't like the idea of deployed and distributed firearms in the community.

There would be a big shift once enough people have been through the process of screening, training, safely securing and then returning to normal life to wait - but I think it would forever change our culture here.

The idea of forcing young men into service to travel overseas to war would fail in the first vote the people have a chance to deliver their voice on.

...unless there is an attack on Australia, then the media will be able to drum up plenty of nationalism. All the people who dare question whether it was as it is being told will be called all the usual names. I look forward to the rational left suddenly agreeing with the rational conservatives about maybe taking a moment to be sure is better than definitely escalating things.

Let's kill 40,000 Australians to avenge 300 Australians!! - Stupid maths.
 
Taylor said:
Conscription would only be peacefully accepted by the population if the home island is attacked or under attack or threatened or the home island army is strictly for deployment within the island.

They've tried holding votes to allow that home guard to be deployed overseas, failed. They tried a vote to have that guard deployed to assist our allies, failed.

It's really the only just position in a war, defending the ground under the homes of your family and community.

I do not think society will stomach the reality of training and equipping all able bodied and of mind men under forty with semi automatic rifles. I think there will be a scare campaign against it, because they don't like the idea of deployed and distributed firearms in the community.

There would be a big shift once enough people have been through the process of screening, training, safely securing and then returning to normal life to wait - but I think it would forever change our culture here.

The idea of forcing young men into service to travel overseas to war would fail in the first vote the people have a chance to deliver their voice on.

...unless there is an attack on Australia, then the media will be able to drum up plenty of nationalism. All the people who dare question whether it was as it is being told will be called all the usual names. I look forward to the rational left suddenly agreeing with the rational conservatives about maybe taking a moment to be sure is better than definitely escalating things.

Let's kill 40,000 Australians to avenge 300 Australians!! - Stupid maths.
Click to expand...
Yeh little bit conspiratorial but mostly agree.

As stated up top of thread, volunteer soldiers hate conscripts, fragging goes nuts, and a armed and trained populace scares the shit out of internal security forces. Doesn't make sense unless you're actually defending your family home and by that stage almost everyone is a volunteer.

The articles/comments by generals in OP are manufacturing consent. Just warming the public up for the constant war that will be running over the next few decades
 
owen87 said:
Older right wingers seem to think military service would fix those young people voting for the left.
Click to expand...
I know quite a few older right wingers including veterans and it is near unanimous that they don't support conscription into the military as it would just create a burden for our already under resourced military. They do like the idea of some mandatory SES training and for long term unemployed to have to do SES or charity work

On SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Rob R said:
I know quite a few older right wingers including veterans and it is near unanimous that they don't support conscription into the military as it would just create a burden for our already under resourced military. They do like the idea of some mandatory SES training and for long term unemployed to have to do SES or charity work

On SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app
Click to expand...
I hate this. We spend billion upon billion on defense force and waste god knows how much on subs and shit

How many resources does it really need...
 
burge13 said:
I hate this. We spend billion upon billion on defense force and waste god knows how much on subs and s**t

How many resources does it really need...
Click to expand...

Should be okay with bulk early warning radar stations, multiple distributed aircraft squadrons with long range anti shipping missiles. Then a submarine counter.

Unfortunately those are the most expensive things.
 
burge13 said:
I hate this. We spend billion upon billion on defense force and waste god knows how much on subs and s**t

How many resources does it really need...
Click to expand...
Probably a lot less if we streamlined the Canberra bureaucracy but look at the recent DSR, first action cut people doing work to create more Canberra crats and senior positions.

And of course if we stopped paying billions extra just to have something built here or modified eg. Hunter, MRH90, French subs


On SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
eaglespremiers said:
An article today on News.com.au
Click to expand...

Lol. The cesspit of 'news' in Australia.

eaglespremiers said:
suggested that in the event of an imminent war conscription may be utilised to bolster defence numbers.
Click to expand...

If it's needed, it's needed. In the event of a major global conflict where Australia's sovereignty is under some kind of existential threat, then sure.

At present, it's not needed.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

The Law Conscription/National Service

Similar threads

HurleyHepsHird
It is time to end the consultancy gravy train and rebuild the public service
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
Demonic Ascent
Demonic Ascent

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top