Conscription: State sponsored slavery?

[Warren Dew]

Did Germany give Europe much choice in the matter? I mean, they took over the Sudetenland and Czechoslovakia, they invaded Poland, they invaded Denmark, Holland, Belgium, France, and Norway. They invaded the balkans, and North Africa, and they started bombing the UK.

I'm not sure what is "unnecessary" about fighting that war under those circumstances.

They only invaded Denmark, Holland, Belgium, France, Norway, the balkans, North Africa, and started bombing the UK after war was declared....by us.

Yes.

Would have made sense for both the French and the British to have backed Hitler in heading to Moscow - economically and possibly even militarily. The Countries in the East (and the Balkans)? well, who gives a shit.......think of the Oil . If he had won and still wanted to head West then we would have had a bigger problem, but odds are that he would have found us too useful economically to attack - and in a few years we (and him!) would have had nukes. We lived with Stalin etc having Nukes and half of Europe - the Nazis no different, except far more likely to tone down the fundy stuff simply for the economics. by then they would have had more land and resources than they knew what to do with.

Quite possibly. The French and the British were still imperial powers at the time, getting their oil from colonies. Germany felt that to compete, she needed her own empire - and with the overseas possessions taken, the plan was to take the slavic areas, with their oil production.

The only issue is that, after the recovery of the Sudeten with Czhechoslovakia and Danzig with Poland, there was one remaining arguably Germanic area not under the Third Reich's control - Alsace Lorraine, which would not easily have been given up by France.

[Hermit]

Traditionally, the basic trooper was an uneducated clodhopper, and the officers were from the aristocratic classes, and the attitude always has been "obey your betters and don't talk back"

That was no longer the case in WWII. My grandfathers were officers in both world wars. The one on my father's side came from several generations of filthy rich Prussian Junkers. When his father died, each of the twelve children inherited one million Goldmarks. The Junkers had pretensions to nobility, and these pretensions were accepted by the Prussian kings, and later the German emperors. His biggest complaint about the way the German military was run during the second was that "whereas you could not become an officer under the Kaiser unless you were of 'good breeding', Hitler would allow any peasant to become one just because he had the ability." That's pretty much verbatim. Contrary to what you say, thinking among the ranks was recognised as a valuable resource and encouraged. Systematically.

As an aside, I don't think active service in the military is a prerequisite for avoiding wildass assumptions about the military in the 21st, nor is it a preventative for holding them.

[Svartalf]

So, is conscription state sponsored slavery?

I argued above that the issue is not black and white.

It's not slavery, because the troops have guns. Slaves don't. Piss off a bunch of heavily armed men a bit too much and watch what happens.

Uh... may I laugh my ass off?

Such highly regarded military castes as the Mamluks and the janissaries were technically slave troops. The establishment of elite standing armies made up of people who were bought (or given as tribute), and definitely nothing like free or citizens, was common in the near east from the 830s on... the ghulam (Arabic for slave/young or junior servant) bodyguards and cavalry of the late Abbasid caliphs were redoubtable, and the customm of recruiting these Turjkic slave soldiers persisted long, even into the fatimid caliphate, the Ghazanvid and Safavid dynasties of Persia, and the Ottoman Empire.. the phenomenon had prolongations into the mamluks and the janissaries.

[Svartalf]

Traditionally, the basic trooper was an uneducated clodhopper, and the officers were from the aristocratic classes, and the attitude always has been "obey your betters and don't talk back"

That was no longer the case in WWII. My grandfathers were officers in both world wars. The one on my father's side came from several generations of filthy rich Prussian Junkers. When his father died, each of the twelve children inherited one million Goldmarks. The Junkers had pretensions to nobility, and these pretensions were accepted by the Prussian kings, and later the German emperors. His biggest complaint about the way the German military was run during the second was that "whereas you could not become an officer under the Kaiser unless you were of 'good breeding', Hitler would allow any peasant to become one just because he had the ability." That's pretty much verbatim. Contrary to what you say, thinking among the ranks was recognised as a valuable resource and encouraged. Systematically.

As an aside, I don't think active service in the military is a prerequisite for avoiding wildass assumptions about the military in the 21st, nor is it a preventative for holding them.

It was in France... which may be the reason we invented the 'elastic defence' strategy...

and the fact your gramps complained about it certainly reflected a lot of traditional minded German military families, which means that coordination among troops may have suffered because officers 'of breeding', with or without ability, might have balked at taking suggestions, let alone orders,n from commoners.

[Thumpalumpacus]

It was in France... which may be the reason we invented the 'elastic defence' strategy...

Pretty sure it predates French military prowess.

and the fact your gramps complained about it certainly reflected a lot of traditional minded German military families, which means that coordination among troops may have suffered because officers 'of breeding', with or without ability, might have balked at taking suggestions, let alone orders,n from commoners.

This isn't borne out by history. The efficiency of German arms in World War II was such that militaries the world over have striven to emulate them. Neither Guderian, nor Rommel, nor Kesselring, nor Jodl, were "vons". And while the Wehrmacht doctrinally encouraged initiative amongst junior officers, disobedience was often court-martialled, and I don't know of any successful "nobility defense" for it.

As an aside, I don't think active service in the military is a prerequisite for avoiding wildass assumptions about the military in the 21st, nor is it a preventative for holding them.

Of course not. But experience with the personnel about which one is speaking would seem to reduce the chances of argumentum ex rectum.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I'll continue laughing, until such time as the less-than-adequately informed have done some fucking time in the trenches.

[Svartalf]

It was in France... which may be the reason we invented the 'elastic defence' strategy...

Pretty sure it predates French military prowess..

Uh, I meant that the me officer, you private mentality was alive and well in the French military in 1940 and may have been the reason we were so soundly trounced.

[Svartalf]

I'll continue laughing, until such time as the less-than-adequately informed have done some fucking time in the trenches.

may you die laughing, the only trench I'll ever visite will be 6feet deep and long.

[Thumpalumpacus]

It was in France... which may be the reason we invented the 'elastic defence' strategy...

Pretty sure it predates French military prowess..

Uh, I meant that the me officer, you private mentality was alive and well in the French military in 1940 and may have been the reason we were so soundly trounced.

Yeah, I was pointing out that defense-in-depth predates its French iteration.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I'll continue laughing, until such time as the less-than-adequately informed have done some fucking time in the trenches.

may you die laughing, the only trench I'll ever visite will be 6feet deep and long.

Most people don't have like the idea of going into combat. I chose it as an immediate way to get away from home.

[Traveler]

I'll continue laughing, until such time as the less-than-adequately informed have done some fucking time in the trenches.

I'm a 54 year old woman with side effects from cancer treatment. I will never be in the trenches, even if I wanted to. Perhaps instead of laughing, you guys could help us understand. If no one tells us what its really like, how do you expect us to know? Especially since many of us were young decades ago. Of course our information is outdated or flat-out wrong. Chortling into your beer doesn't help the communication here at all.

So, please, someone, explain what its like. Thanks.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I'll continue laughing, until such time as the less-than-adequately informed have done some fucking time in the trenches.

I'm a 54 year old woman with side effects from cancer treatment. I will never be in the trenches, even if I wanted to. Perhaps instead of laughing, you guys could help us understand. If no one tells us what its really like, how do you expect us to know? Especially since many of us were young decades ago. Of course our information is outdated or flat-out wrong. Chortling into your beer doesn't help the communication here at all.

So, please, someone, explain what its like. Thanks.

Well, that's been going on in this thread. Did you have a particular question in mind?

What GZ is expressing here (I think) is not contempt for all civilians, and certainly not those who sincerely want to know, but rather, frustration at the bandying of shallow stereotypes culled from movies and bruited about as fact by people who wouldn't know their ass from third base about what it's really like.

Here's some of the posts I've put up in an effort to clarify relations between superiors and subordinates:

http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... 8#p1173268
http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... 5#p1173275
http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... 3#p1173803
http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... 1#p1174471

If you have a question about something else, feel free to ask.

Also, my earnest well-wishes on your continued, and complete, recovery.

[Traveler]

Thank you, Thumpalumpacus. That's very helpful. I've tried to keep up with the thread, but missed a few posts in the ten pages, because a lot of the world war posts were, I'm afraid, losing my interest, so I started skimming. I have a lot of respect for folks who are willing to serve in the military. I believe that I'm not at all suited for it, and definately do/did have some misconceptions about it. Probably many based on mass media such as movies. And many based on the American attitudes during the Vietnam War. I can tell you this, it drove me CRAZY that anyone could dis' a soldier coming home from that hell. The individuals who fight deserve our every support in healing from the trauma of war. I will never be able to fully understand what combat soldiers experience, and I wish for a day when no one has to do it.

And thanks for your well wishes.

[Cunt]

A comic I like said that war can be blamed on the individual soldiers. Simple to dismiss, but he WAS experienced with military service.

I thought about it since then, and it seems true. Every man who shot at 'enemies' instead of running scared (or suiciding) is responsible for their wars. Likely knew it, too.

Give a thought to what it means to have that kind of responsibility on your conscience the rest of your life. Creepy.

As to the original post, conscription IS slavery. Wear those poppies to remember the slave armies. Don't mention it, though. Not everyone likes to admit that there indeed were slave armies quite recently.

[Ian]

With respect, I thoroughly disagree.

Maybe I'll articulate that more later, but I'm too tired right now.