Now, the words and figures “with the exception of articles 2-c, 4-c, 5-c, 12-c, 13-c, 14-c, 17-c, 21-c and 22-c” have been removed from the Regulation, i.e. everyone will be recognised as fit under the “controversial” articles:
- 2-c – clinically treated tuberculosis;
- 4-c – viral hepatitis with minor functional impairment;
- 5-c – asymptomatic HIV carrier;
- 12-c - slowly progressive and non-progressive with minor functional impairment and rare exacerbations of anaemia, blood clotting disorders, purpura, haemorrhagic conditions, other diseases of the blood and haematopoietic organs, and some disorders involving the immune mechanism;
- 13-c - diseases of the endocrine system with minor functional disorders;
- 14-c - mild, short-term, painful manifestations of mental disorders;
- 17-c - neurotic, stress-related and somatoform disorders with moderate or short-term manifestations, with an asthenic state;
- 21-c – slowly progressive diseases of the central nervous system with minor functional disorders;
- 22-c – episodic and paroxysmal disorders, except for epilepsy, with minor impairment of organ and system functions.
It doesn’t feel like a great idea to conscript those with mental health issues heavily impacted by stress.
Could always be used in administrative roles
True. I always read conscription and think “sent to the frontlines”, but there’s a lot of logistics and support that goes into an army.
My dad got drafted during Vietnam, and landed himself a position doing some supply/logistics stuff and basically spent his whole time chilling in Kentucky doing warehouse and office stuff. Admittedly he also did his damnedest on every aptitude test, evaluation, etc. they gave him to make himself out to be a coward and play up any non-combat skills he had specifically trying to end up doing something like that.
There’s of course a lot of differences between 'Nam and Ukraine, but at the end of the day every army throughout history has relied on a whole bunch of people who weren’t on the front lines to make things work. You need a whole lot of mechanics, warehouse workers, pencil pushers, IT staff, cooks, medical staff, truck drivers, etc. and if you’re able to use people who wouldn’t be able to hack it physically/mentally/emotionally on the front lines to fill those roles, it’s kind of a no-brainer so that soldiers who are able to do it aren’t tied up behind the scenes when they’re needed.
Of course it absolutely sucks for anyone who gets conscripted.
Somewhat similar to what happened to my grandpa. Technically wasn’t drafted, he had buddy in the draft office gave him a heads up that’d it’d be a very good idea for him to enlist soon. He ended up as a supply officer in Okinawa and got to take my grandma with him. Good thing too (and largely why it happened), the man’s eyesight is/was awful. He would’ve almost certainly been a dead man had he ever lost his glasses in combat
It’s a terrible idea and it tells me that all the propaganda were getting about Ukraine clearly winning and barely losing anyone is bullshit. They must be real desperate if they’re conscription people with mental disorders.
Look at the list and stop talking out your ass. Wars are won due to logistics, lots of paperwork and so on. Granted, the situation could be better, but let’s not pretend Ukraine has its back against a wall.
They are still kicking Russia like nothing before.
Also, they are not just accepting any mental disorder, there are many disorders that may prevent someone to be in the front, but they don’t prevent one to carry supplies from A-B in the back country. Wars are not just won through fights on the front.
If they could read they’d be super shocked by who the Russians are conscripting.
Who are the Russians conscripting?
Both Wagner and the regular military have been conscripting criminals straight out of prison and sending them right into the meat grinder with little training and/or equipment.
as has Ukraine lol
No. Not as a deliberate tactic and not nearly to the same extent.
Wow… How do you think this works? Where are wars “won”? How is this not an act of desperation?
A wall is only as strong as its weakest section. This is indeed not great news.
My thoughts exactly. You put me on the front line and my general commander is getting a bullet. Not saying I’ll remember doing it but nobody dies except those that force me to kill.
Saying you don’t “remember” doing it is probably not going to help much in your court-martial when you’ve posted a pre-meditated plan to do it on an open social media platform beforehand.
Who tf cares lmfao.
You’ve been warned global military
/r/IAmVeryBadass
I would rather die than kill. If you tell me to kill I will kill you first to limit the amount of total death.
This is the ultimate utilitarian take on the ethics of the situation you dunce.
You say you’d rather die than kill, and then in the very next line you threaten to kill me for telling you something.
You need to read up on what being a “conscientious objector” is actually about, or whatever it is you’re going for here, because your philosophy is incoherent.
Believe it or not, this would completely cripple military power across the board. Overall, resulting in less death than the death of the white collar pencil pushers that command troops.
Sure you can be the bootlicker that shoots people for funsies, don’t come crying to me when you get drafted
Edit: where tf did I threaten you specifically?..
You said:
Even if you just mean it as a “generic” you, you’re still making it quite clear that you’re more willing to kill than you are to die.
You realize there are other options than “follow orders to kill someone” and “kill the guy who gave you an order”, right?
I’m Canadian.