| Revision as of 08:53, 6 March 2003 editSusan Mason (talk | contribs)1,955 editsmNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:26, 9 March 2003 edit undoKchishol1970 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users24,511 editsmNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| Some countries require by law that their citizens serve a term in their ]. This process is known as '''conscription''', or colloquially as "'''the draft'''". Most countries only draft men, although some (e.g., ]) also draft women. Except in wartime, the ] (and many other nations) has a strictly volunteer, or professional, military force, rather than relying on conscription. | Some countries require by law that their citizens serve a term in their ]. This process is known as '''conscription''', or colloquially as "'''the draft'''". Most countries only draft men, although some (e.g., ]) also draft women. Except in wartime, the ] (and many other nations) has a strictly volunteer, or professional, military force, rather than relying on conscription. | ||
| Conscription, particularly when the conscripts are being sent to foreign wars that do not directly affect the security of the nation, has historically been highly politically contentious in democracies. For instance, during ], bitter political disputes broke out in ] and ] over conscription. Similarly, mass protests about conscription to fight in the ] occurred in several countries in the late ]. | Conscription, particularly when the conscripts are being sent to foreign wars that do not directly affect the security of the nation, has historically been highly politically contentious in democracies. For instance, during ], bitter political disputes broke out in ],] and ] over conscription. Similarly, mass protests about conscription to fight in the ] occurred in several countries in the late ]. | ||
| In developed nations, the increasing emphasis on technological firepower and better-trained fighting forces, the sheer unlikelihood of a conventional military assault on most developed nations, as well as memories of the contentiousness of the Vietnam War experience, make mass conscription unlikely in the forseeable future. | In developed nations, the increasing emphasis on technological firepower and better-trained fighting forces, the sheer unlikelihood of a conventional military assault on most developed nations, as well as memories of the contentiousness of the Vietnam War experience, make mass conscription unlikely in the forseeable future. | ||
Revision as of 04:26, 9 March 2003
Some countries require by law that their citizens serve a term in their armed forces. This process is known as conscription, or colloquially as "the draft". Most countries only draft men, although some (e.g., Israel) also draft women. Except in wartime, the United States (and many other nations) has a strictly volunteer, or professional, military force, rather than relying on conscription.
Conscription, particularly when the conscripts are being sent to foreign wars that do not directly affect the security of the nation, has historically been highly politically contentious in democracies. For instance, during World War One, bitter political disputes broke out in Canada,Australia and New Zealand over conscription. Similarly, mass protests about conscription to fight in the Vietnam War occurred in several countries in the late 1960s.
In developed nations, the increasing emphasis on technological firepower and better-trained fighting forces, the sheer unlikelihood of a conventional military assault on most developed nations, as well as memories of the contentiousness of the Vietnam War experience, make mass conscription unlikely in the forseeable future.
Russia and China, as well as many smaller nations, retain mainly conscript armies.
Conscientious objectors
A "conscientious objector" is an individual whose personal beliefs are incompatible with military service, or sometimes with any role in the armed forces. The reasons for refusing to serve are varied. Many conscientious objectors are so for religious reasons -- notably, the Quakers are pacifist by doctrine. Other objections can stem from a deep sense of responsibility toward humanity as a whole, or from simple denial that any government should have that kind of moral authority.
The legal status of conscientious objectors has varied over the years and from nation to nation. Many conscientious objectors have been imprisoned for refusing to participate in wars. In the United States, the Supreme Court ruled in 1970 that it is not necessary for a conscientious objector to have a religious basis for their beliefs.
Some conscientious objectors are unwilling to serve the military in any capacity, while others are willing to serve in non-combatant roles; in World War I, many conscientious objectors drove ambulances, often under fire. In World War II, some conscientious objectors volunteered for hazardous scientific experiments.
Other draft evaders
Not everyone who was conscripted was willing to give up their lives figuratively (and often literally) in the service of their country.
Many young people with families with political connections used those connections to ensure that they were placed well away from any potential harm. Others used educational exemptions, or became conscientious objectors.
For others, the commonest method of avoiding the draft was to cross the border into another country. People who have been "called up" for military service and who attempted to avoid it in some way, were known as "draft-dodgers".
American draft-dodgers made their way to Canada or Mexico. Australian draft-dodgers had a harder time leaving the country due to the ocean, but "going bush" worked just as well in the short term for many of them.
Many people looked upon draft-dodgers with scorn as being "cowards", but some supported them in their efforts.
See also Military history