• Arkouda@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    A lot of opinion over the fact that Canada, in its entire history, has only used conscription twice and it was for two major conflicts. The arguments you are attempting to make are moot when considering this very big fact. Obviously no one, excluding the nuts from the same tree, would be super keen on conscription to fight a meaningless war.

    If it is hard to imagine a war Canada would be fighting to defend itself worry not because the arctic is thawing and a few countries are salivating over it.

    • TheShadow277@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      A lot of opinion over the fact that Canada, in its entire history, has only used conscription twice and it was for two major conflicts

      I never claimed otherwise.

      The arguments you are attempting to make are moot when considering this very big fact

      Not really. It has nothing to do with how many times Canada has used conscription.

      If it is hard to imagine a war Canada would be fighting to defend itself worry not because the arctic is thawing and a few countries are salivating over it.

      I imagine if a straight up war of conquest over Canada’s north happened, more Canadian’s would be willing to help with that and conscription would probably be unnecessary. That highly depends on our feelings of national unity, which to me seem to be at an all time low (in my lifetime). I feel that any attempt by the federal government to introduce compulsory military service would be disastrous as there’s high tensions when it comes to the prairie provinces and Quebec. Why would they consent to their peoples being forced to fight and die for a united Canada when they don’t feel like Canada should be united?

      I don’t know how they would plan to address this, but I feel Canada would need a large reason to be unified if they were to introduce conscription, and the current climate isn’t it.

      • Arkouda@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        I never claimed otherwise.

        I never said you did, nor am I here to argue with you about this.

        The point was the commenter, who isn’t you, brought up wars that have nothing to do with conscription. Which is why I brought up WW1 and WW2 in the first place.

        Similarly, if conscription did take place on a gender-neutral basis for both men and women, 50 per cent of Canadians would oppose it. With the exact reverse also holding true, a large percentage of Canadians may potentially support conscription if the right scenario arose.

        The topic is conscription and if Canadians support it.The survey and article states a 50/50 split on Gender neutral conscription, and support if the right situation arose. We aren’t talking about if shit goes down would conscription even be necessary, and we are not talking about how unified Canada is or isn’t

        Stay on point if you wish to continue speaking to me please.

    • njm1314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Brother if you consider the idea that there would be future conscriptions moot why are you even here? That’s the topic. That’s what we talking about. If you don’t want to consider the possibility there could be future contributions then you are kind of wasting everyone’s time here because again that’s the topic.

      • Arkouda@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Brother if you consider the idea that there would be future conscriptions moot why are you even here?

        Funny because I never said that.

        Give the thread another once over and try again. Do your best not to waste my time by staying on topic with your second attempt.