Talk:Military service

Question on links

I want to comment but i don't know how so if anyone is having problem with this please delete it i dont want any trouble, i just wanna tell you that Greece announced that its conscription is 9 months and not 12 as its says. Im very sorry again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Επιστήμων (talk • contribs) 19:43, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Why are there links to very few articles in the Nations list? Leobold1 (talk) 03:04, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Disposition of Article

I fail to see how this can be anything but a dictionary definition, not an encyclopedia article. (Next thing you know, somebody will create "List of people who have served in the military" .... or maybe "Pokeman characters who have served in the military") - DavidWBrooks 13:38, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Well, information about nations with compulsory military service can be included, as well as background on the debate as to whether or not that's a good idea and its historical implications. That's just one area of it. Kurt Weber 15:09, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Actually, all information about modern-day mandatory service should be moved to conscription which is where those disambiguating redirects already point. --Joy [shallot] 21:02, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

AlMac|^(talk) Suggests that this article be compared to National service ... there may be some duplicated material, that can be merged. AlMac|^(talk) 17:38, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

The statement about some countries having mandated military service is nonsense. The vast majority of states worldwide have armed forces that are mandated by their governments, as opposed to being private militias. Is the purpose of the article to describe conscription I wonder ? If so, then merging with that article or with National Service should be considered. Also, I think wikipedia needs to get away from using the confusing term military as it can either mean "of armed forces" or "of armies" simultaneously, leading to confusion...unless "military service" is a term in official use, that is.JRL 08:42, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Categories

There have been several requests to try to organize Category Military since it has over 50 articles and over 50 sub-categories. I am trying to help out, by adding a new sub-category Politics of Military, which will include this, and other articles about aspects of recruiting people into the military that can be controversial, such as the topic of very young children being made into child soldiers, also issues of gender, different religions side by side, conscientious objector and so forth. AlMac|^(talk) 17:15, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

The Map

Why is it that the map "Weltkarte der Armeeformen.png" undergoes such constant changes, more often than the changes of policies of countries all over the world? Qrfqr 07:17, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The Map is vastly inaccurate if what the article says is true.

European Court of Human Rights and Sexism

Have any men from member countries that practice conscription taken cases to the European Court of Human Rights arguing that conscription of men but not women violates Article 14 prohibition of discrimination? If so, on what legal grounds did the court reject their cases? 81.152.197.19 20:55, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Interesting question, but I know of no such case. The ECHR did force Germany to allow women to serve in 2000 (previously the German constitution prohibited women from serving in the military, while forcing the men to serve), thus removing the discrimination of women, but the discrimination of men is still in place, as of 2010.--Roentgenium111 (talk) 23:33, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

The summary list

The poorly formatted summary list would be better as a map or as a table. --Vuo (talk) 22:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Enlistment

I came here to find out about enlistment, and I must say this article is rather uninformative, the only real info in here is what countries have mandatory and which do not. It doesn't say anything about enlistment, how modern enlistment formed, the difference between enlistment and commission or any real info of the type, instead it presents info that should be in an article called List of Countries with Mandatory Military Service and Those Without or List of Countries with Conscription, or something similar. Furthermore, at least according to other articles, some of it is wrong, for instance "As of 2007, the Russian Federation has a mandatory 12 months draft." According to what I read in the Russian Military article it is 18 months but there are plans to cut it down to 12 in 2008. Infact this article contradicts itself, first saying 12 then 18, what a poorly written, lacking in references and inaccurate provider of infortmation in relation to the title of the article this is, you should all be ashamed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.137.207.191 (talk) 12:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC) Additionally, many in the list of how to get out of the draft for Russia is just stupid, of course bribery, you can get almost anything for bribery, thats what bribery is. Of course DRAFT DODGING, thats what draft dodging is, dodging the draft, do you really need to state that you can dodge the draft by draft dodging like its never been used before? And it is "sometimes a criminal offense"? As in sometimes its illegal to run over people shoot a gun in public? That is not sometimes, it is always illegal, the question is if you get caught or if they push for charges, that old lady you ran over doesn't have to charge you, its just her most likely reaction. "There are other legal (described in the law) and illegal ways to evade the draft.", thats not a way, thats just saying your too lazy to do it properly. If your not doing the 100% list of every way out your giving afew examples (which are not the most popular because you don't actually have any references so its just the most popular in your opinion). Words like rare, without numbers to back it up, are opinions. Even with the numbers it is a word that describes the situation in someones opinion. Relatively rare is less opionated as it states in relation to other things. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.137.207.191 (talk) 13:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you need the Armed Forces section? The Flatfoot Eligius (talk) 00:44, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Military Service in Norway

I know a guy that has just moved to Wales (He's Norwegian) and he is 19 and hasn't done any military serice. The article says that Military service is mandatory but also says something about stays abroad and deferrals. Does this mean that he doesn't have to do military service or that he has to go back at some point and do it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.207.160.254 (talk • contribs)

Depends on the actual case and the Norwegian legislation. I think that your friend gets all the information he needs by contacting the Norwegian embassy at London. --MPorciusCato (talk) 12:24, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Italy

Does anybody know if, back when Italy had compulsory military service, you could serve in the Carabinieri? 92.80.30.42 (talk) 18:45, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Philippines

Which section can we put the Philippines if the nature of the service is as follows:

Although there is no known compulsory military service, high school and college students used to have compulsory military training in the form of Citizen's Army Training (CAT) and Reserve Officers' Training Corps respectively (ROTC) which were part of their educational curriculum. However, after reforms to the law, Citizen's Army Training for high school has become Citizen's Advancement Training where non-military components are added while in the college level, students have a National Service Training Programme (NSTP) where they can choose from military and non-military options. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.6.143.231 (talk) 01:46, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

finland

the article is very biased and lacks sources to back up the facts. it seems to be written mainly to attract negative political attention against the draft system in use. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.150.114.104 (talk) 20:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Uruguay

Why aren't most countries in the conscription under special circumstances category? Most countries have a draft of some sort that they can use during times of war.

Algerian War

I have changed a reference in the France section to the "Algerian War of Independence" to the more generally accepted - and more neutral - "Algerian War".

Wordtothedude (talk) 23:18, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Israel

Israel is listed in the "Military service longer than 18 months, no unarmed option" section. In fact, in Israel there's an option for social service - but for women only. I was enforced to conscript ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcovitaly (talk • contribs) 17:01, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Penalty for Refusing to Serve in Sweden

Is the penalty for refusing to serve in Sweden only one month (as the article on the singer Harpo alleges)? You might as well go to jail! The Flatfoot Eligius (talk) 23:10, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Sweden has abolished conscription

as of today. Someone with the know-how should update the map. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.227.189.9 (talk) 10:03, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Serbia has abolished conscription

as of 30 September 2010. --Rastko Pocesta (talk) 23:31, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Indonesia conscription is not enforced

Indonesia have all profesional military, conscription exist but is not necesary for the long volunteer people . --nahuel11(talk) 22:45, 26 Junuary 2011 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Military_service" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.48.212.28 (talk) 01:45, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Stop adding Taiwan in the list of "conscription to be abolished in the near future"

I don't know who keeps adding Taiwan in the list. Taiwan is NOT going to abolish the military conscription after 2014 or 2015. Males who choose not to join the armed force voluntarily will be conscripted to a 3 to 4 month military training, which, according to the law [1], is a kind of military service. Qrfqr (talk) 14:19, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Map inaccurate

Will need to be updated soon due to Germany, but other places like Colombia and Georgia are mis-colored as orange (which is wrong, as no changes for those places are planned). That-Vela-Fella (talk) 11:20, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Getting better, but still has Georgia wrong as well as the Philippines and maybe a few others.That-Vela-Fella (talk) 23:56, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Status of USA

Hi everyone,

Just a thought, but doesn't the fact that the US government legally requires people to register for the Selective Service mean that technically the US should fall under the category of "Conscription only in special circumstances"?

The description of Belize's situation, for example, is "conscription only if volunteers are insufficient; conscription has never been implemented". This is essentially what the system is like in the United States, if you add "since 1973" to the end of that sentence. Since it's illegal for males in America not to register for Selective Service, conscription is possible in theory, even if it's not likely at the present time. In an extreme situation, however, the US government could easily reinstate the draft.

I suspect the situation is the same for a few of the other countries in the "no enforced conscription" list as well. I only know about the Selective Service in America because it was drilled into our heads in high school that on your 18th birthday, you have to register for it, there's a huge fine and you could go to jail, etc. etc... Does someone who grew up in any of the other "no enforced conscription" countries have any info about this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.198.188.97 (talk) 03:36, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, I think the division should go more into "not enforced conscription" and "mandatory military service" (that is, military SERVICE, not just registration). There are a few countries which could reinstitute conscription as a war-time measure. But any country could just pass a new law during a war anyway? I suppose the USA needs a legislative decision to conduct a new draft, so opposed to this: "if the US declares a state of war, conscription will be in place by default". --Pudeo' 16:25, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

That seems reasonable, since it does state within the article of Selective Service System that it "...is a means by which the United States government maintains information on those potentially subject to military conscription.", but I have no idea if other nations also do this practice. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 05:56, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Misleading sectioning and map

Many of the countries listed under "Countries with mandatory military service" do not require their citizens to serve in the military as explained in the subsections. Countries like Austria, Finland, Greece offer civilian alternatives. Many countries allow conscientious objection. In countries like Brazil, military service is required in theory but not in practice. These examples highly contrast with countries where people have no choice but to serve in the military as soldiers, and hence they should be moved to a different section (and be shown with a different color on the map). --386-DX (talk) 23:17, 16 November 2011 (UTC)