Germany Mulls Reviving Draft To Beef Up Military Amid War In Ukraine

Conscription was introduced in Germany back in 1956, with all men over the age of 18 expected to serve at least one year in the army (although they could claim exemption for moral reasons). But the draft was scrapped to save money, as Germany’s military endured a long post-war decline.

But Moscow’s increasingly aggressive posture on the global stage has given the Germans reason to reverse this decline.

In recent days, German politicians have called for a revival of some form of mandatory military service, according to France24.

Wolfgang Hellmich, a politician for Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s centre-left Social Democrats (SPD), called for an “urgent” debate on the issue in an interview with the Rheinische Post newspaper on Tuesday.

Compulsory military service would help “promote public spirit,” he said, also calling for careers in the Bundeswehr to be made more attractive to young people.

The president of Germany’s association of reservists has called on the government to reintroduce a “general framework” for military service for both men and women. This could take the form of “one year in which young people who are of age and have completed their education do something for the state and the community”, he told the Rheinische Post newspaper.

Members of the CDU, the party of Angela Merkel that is now in the opposition after 16 years in power, have also expressed support for bringing back the draft. Members from the state of Lower Saxony have gone so far as to publish a paper calling for the reintroduction of military service.

Voices from the conservative CDU, now in opposition after 16 years in power under Angela Merkel, have also come out in favour of conscription.

In the state of Lower Saxony, CDU members have put together a paper calling for the reintroduction of military service as “a decisive signal for ensuring an effective military deterrence,” according to Die Welt newspaper.

CDU MP Carsten Linnemann told the Bild daily he was in favour of “a year of compulsory service for young men and women after completing their schooling”.

This could also take the form of a year of service in the social care sector or the emergency services, he said.

“This would strengthen the resilience of our society to crises” and promote skills that are necessary in “these persistently difficult times”, he said.

Eva Hoegl, a Social Democrat and the Bundestag’s defence commissioner, has called the debate “a theoretical discussion that does not help in the current situation”.

And Florian Hahn of the CSU, the CDU’s Bavarian sister party, said Germany needs “technology and weapons systems”, not just an increased head count.

Since the end of the Cold War, Germany has steadily reduced the size of its army from around 500K at the time of German reunification in 1990 to just 200K today.

Obviously you are not aware that we won World War II against two superpowers with a mostly drafted military.

I'm very well aware of that, thank you. But the situation in 2022 is vastly different than the ones we saw in 1917-18 and 1941-45 in some very major respects: 1) In those wars, we needed very large numbers of people to send overseas for an active war, in large part to replace significant casualties. We were looking for bodies, not "the best" or even necessarily "the good". Are you planning on sending literally millions of Americans overseas to fight in a major land war sometimes soon?

2) In those wars, you also needed large number of infantry that didn't need to be all that well trained, and that were generally operating equipment that was not that sophisticated. So, you could send someone to boot camp, some minimal infantry training, and send them off to a battlefield in 3 months. Weaponry, communications, equipment, etc. all have become much more complex since then, even for basic infantry. Putting all that additional time and money into someone who only has a 12 month enlistment in the first place is utterly pointless. And it makes even less sense for all the military jobs that are even more technologically oriented.

3) Because of the increased use of technology and the relatively poor physical condition of more young Americans, about 75% of Americans of draftable age fall below current military standards, either because of health, physical fitness, lack of intelligence necessary to understand current technology, or something else.

https://www.thoughtco.com/us-youth-ineligible-for-military-service-3322428

What that means is that it would be comparatively easy for potential draftees to disqualify themselves, either through a deliberate lack of fitness, performing worse on intelligence/aptitude tests than they are capable, etc.. So either we take in everyone regardless of whether they are suitable or not, or your draft is going to have more holes than cheese.

4) We spend far more equipping and training current troops on a per man basis than we did 80 or 100 years ago, and that again is due to technology and more sophisticated warfare. Taking a bunch of unwilling draftees and spending huge amounts of money on people who don't want to be there in the first place, and will be getting out as soon as possible, is a massive waste of money.

5) Americans accepted the need for drafts in 1917 and 1941 because of a strong national sentiment that we were entering a large scale shooting war that needed to be fought. That same military need simply does not exist now, and you will have mass resistance/protest against a draft perceived as completely unnecessary. That is a massive national headache that will mean even greater headaches for those career NCO's and Officers whose goal -- rightly -- is to build the most capable force possible rather than having a draft simply for some idea of social good.

I was commissioned not long after the draft ended, and every single Vietnam vet NCO and officer I knew thought that the difference in troop quality, discipline, esprit de corps, etc., was massively improved by going to an all volunteer force.

The hard truth is that a significant percentage of people are simply not suited for the military. If it is a case of national survival and you need to maximize the number of bodies in uniform, that's different. If the crappy soldier craps themselves and gets killed...just draft another. Otherwise, give me the highly motivated volunteer who actually wanted to be there 10 times out of 10.

For the vast majority of this country's history, we didn't have a military draft. And even then, except during times of actual war, it wasn't universal. Which means only the unlucky few got the "maturation" to which you were referring. Most never served anyway.

It's a good thing we do have that division between the volunteer military and a much softer, weaker civilian world, or our military would be getting its collective asses kicked on a regular basis.

I'd also point out this -- when you have an all volunteer military, the nation must provide its servicemembers with a decent standard of living, benefits, etc., to get them to join up in the first place, and hopefully to reenlist. That means military pay and benefits with a volunteer military are much better than they are with a drafted military. Although you're still never going to get rich.

The second you go to a draft, Congress no longer has that pressure to provide those same benefits, which means the vast majority of the country that escapes military service (including the 75% who aren't suitable for military service), can afford to shortchange those in the military. So you've still got "two societies", except the minority that does serve in the military get even more screwed than before.

So far, nobody has convinced me we don’t need the draft.

Your arguments are poor, hackneyed, and not back up by the facts.

The claim that 75% of young men are not qualified is thrown out with no facts to back it up. Those misfits posters here have decried in the past have included the likes of Alvin York and Audrey Murphy.

Thanks to the buffoons now running this country - civilian AND military - we are on an irreversible vector to World War III against two major superpowers and two allied clones with nuclear weapons and do not have manpower and resources, let alone the willpower lacking in a spoiled generation which hates its own country, to stop them.

We have the smallest Army, Navy, and Air Force since the 1930s.

As was said before, and mocked by the draft-dodging elitists, you go to war with the military you have, not the one you’d like to have or think you can raise in a time of 30 minute missiles, instantaneous cyberwar, and peer level adversaries.

We need the draft.
Try again to change my mind.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.