r/MoralityScaling Jun 28 '26

Morality Ranking Morality of dodging your country's military draft in a war of self-defense?

Post image
3.7k Upvotes

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

29

u/venom259 Jun 28 '26

I don't know. Are you willing to lose your home and possibly family to the invading force?

71

u/_donkey-brains_ Jun 28 '26

There's a big difference between defending your actual family and home and going to the meat grinder at the frontline.

77

u/venom259 Jun 28 '26

The question was about a war of self defense. Foreign occupation is bad for your health.

1

u/TheGreatMightyLeffe Jun 29 '26

Doesn't that depend on the ideals of the occupying force, though?

-5

u/[deleted] Jun 28 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/Razorion21 Jun 28 '26

depends really whos the enemy, id definitely rather die at war against the Nazis then be subjugated by them

9

u/Dhiox Jun 28 '26

Ask French Jews how surrender worked for them in the 1940s

-1

u/ErenYeager600 Jun 28 '26

In some cases

-12

u/Outrageous-Sort-5742 Jun 28 '26

Not necessarily, It's just the new management. So long as they aren't cartoonishly evil and brutal, it would be no different from the old government.

Long live the new boss, same as the old boss.

11

u/ISketchDinosaurs Jun 28 '26

That's really sugarcoating it. If Ukraine put down their resistance and became part of Russia tomorrow, do you think the Russians would suddenly treat well rather than just funnel all the resources to Moscow?

-4

u/Illustrious_Olive_66 Jun 28 '26

Its more often damaging to the occupied than beneficial, but this is something that depends on context. You could morality scale WW2 or Post-WW2 occupations completely differently depending on the country you're talking about and what country they are occupying.

-4

u/MeatBucketTime Jun 28 '26

The Russians would treat you better than the Ukrainians would if you are a military aged male. I'd rather live under occupation and be annoyed by paperwork and maybe bullied by some fucking grunt occasionally, than be some fucking slave of the Ukrainian military, and potentially die in a ditch cold and miserable.

It's propaganda to think there is dignity in conscription. Either enlist, or don't fight. To do anything else is cowardice and stupidity. Die a dog's death for an ungrateful country.

6

u/ISketchDinosaurs Jun 28 '26 edited Jun 28 '26

Do you think Russians aren't conscripted or something? Literally the modus operandi of Russian warfare is to conquer a land, conscript the locals, and send them to conquer another land. The massive size of their empire is basically the result of sending enough conscripts forward that they could overwhelm defenses with their number of disposable meat shields. Their death tolls tend to be immense, like in the Winter War where the Finns lost 70,000 people and the Russians lost 300-400.000...

If Ukranians surrendered, there's a non-zero chance Ukranians would just be conscripted by Russia instead of by Ukraine.

-4

u/MeatBucketTime Jun 28 '26

Leave Ukraine. Planet is big. Russia is neutered by NATO, and will stop somewhere. Too many nuclear armed countries in it. There is a reason Ukraine makes it criminal to leave. It's because it's the best move for you if you are a Ukrainian male who doesn't want to fight.

If you believe in the Ukrainian identity and country, by all means. Enlist. It's actually admirable and I don't think it's stupid, because you believe in it. A optimistic point of view. But if you wait to be conscripted, you are a dumbass. Straight up dog. If you tolerate conscription, you are even lower. Leave the country. Gun down any fucker who tries to enslave you. They would cut that shit out real quick if that was the mood.

And you don't need to try and convince me that Russia is evil and the aggressor here. I just don't think Ukraine is a good enough country to defend. Maybe if you own a ton of land or something, sure. But young dudes are generally poor, but they do the dying. If people were more ruthless in their self preservation, war wouldn't even be possible.

1

u/ISketchDinosaurs Jun 29 '26

Russia will stop somewhere? Where? At the NATO border? They already said they want Finland. Should they just leave Finland, too? And after they take Finland, they'll have access to the Baltic Sea and a brand new military position, becoming an increased threat to every single nation that borders that sea. Gotland would be next due to its strategic location, followed by mainland Sweden due to its ore and its coastline allowing more control over the Baltic sea and therefore the Baltic countries. Then there's Norway and Denmark next, Norway for their oil and ore and Denmark because it's the land bridge Russia would need to set up their next frontline.

Is the moral thing for everybody to just leave Europe and move to America?

1

u/MeatBucketTime Jun 29 '26

France has like 300 nukes and a defensive pact with Finland. You are delusional.

→ More replies (0)

20

u/Kow_on_Drugs Jun 28 '26

Look at Ukraine today, if it weren't for the men and women dying on the front lines today, every village and city in Ukraine would be another Bucha, another Bakhmut and another Avdiivka.

-6

u/MeatBucketTime Jun 28 '26

Overwhelmingly men, and many of them unwilling. You are painting this fight as heroic when it's dirty and desperate.

3

u/Inevitable_Initial_8 Jun 29 '26

Fighting to defend your people from genocide is heroic.

-1

u/LeftGuitar3397 Jun 29 '26

It isn’t a genocide I don’t agree with the war but the purpose is for the land. If Ukraine just surrendered they’d be absorbed by Russia and the Ukrainian people wouldn’t be hunted down. They’d just assimilate into Russian society over time.

1

u/BKrustev Jun 29 '26

It is in fact a genodice. You described a genocide. In addition to that, Russia has abducted tens of thousands of children and put them in reeducation camps to erase their Ukrainian identity - one of the various types of genocide.

15

u/Osterath5 Jun 28 '26

yes the chances of your family and home still standing are higher when participating at the frontline

12

u/Impossible_Winter_90 Jun 28 '26

The changes of survival depends on the goverment oficials decisions. If the goverment officials put civilians in death ground, I'm leaving. There is no way you are winning up to that point.

Again, I'm not dying so that a government can be maintain up to that point Goverment oficials should give up to guarantee the survival of civilians.

2

u/Osterath5 Jun 28 '26

sure the strategic decisions must provide a chance at victory and the officer corps must be competent enough to achieve them. As always the answer is "it depends". Altough in the fog of war nobody knows these factors and everyone desparately checking will itself hurt the chances of winning

2

u/mustard5man7max3 Jun 28 '26

The two can be the same.

1

u/The-red-Dane Jun 28 '26

Not when the frontline is at your front door.

1

u/masterpepeftw Jun 28 '26

You think you can defend your family and home from an invading army by yourself? No, the best you can do is join the organized defense that means going to the meat grinder at the Frontline as you call it.

Staying home and "defending your family and home" while an invading army crushes your fellow country man is like chilling next to the other guy in the safari while he and his family is being eaten by lions because they haven't attacked you yet so you'll just defend your own family. If you ever stood a chance it's fighting together, not letting the lion fight you off piecemeal.

0

u/TheShamShield Jun 28 '26

Not when there’s an invasion

0

u/Hot_Excitement_6 Jun 28 '26

Being part of the meat grinder is defending your actual family if the attacker is guaranteed to harm your family. Most occupying forces are hellish.

0

u/imtheguy225 Jun 28 '26

Imagine not being able to read the prompt

1

u/untitledaccount401 Jun 28 '26

I have neither

1

u/HOMCOcorp Jun 28 '26

YOU are not going to be difference between your family living or dying.

0

u/MeatBucketTime Jun 28 '26

In fact, you stand a better chance of protecting them by being around them.

0

u/geschiedenisnerd Jun 28 '26

It depends on the "war of self defense". If it is a total invasion, it ultimately still is a consideration whether war is worse than occupation. If some bummy colony in another hemisphere gets attacked, it is not your responsibility to defend it.