Message from @Aki
Discord ID: 533969396981432351
Many do not find military service an attractive offer however especially as money is very hard to enjoy when dead
Typically foreign services are subjected to more, not less dangerous positions than their domestically sourced counterparts
The reason being very simple, no one at home will miss them
Being prepared to put up with that and traditionally being underpaid compared to their counterparts demonstrates at least for the period of service that those members who serve their time must find their achievement more valuable to justify that difference and have achieved more with less. The past being the best indicator of the future, it’s realistic to expect that behaviour of excellence to continue
Lets be honest here... in the modern times military serive in a developped country is not that harsh in comparition to what it used to be. Most of the wars nowdays do not happen between equals and the casualites on the side of the modern country are very limited in such confrontations.
Please do some research on the French foreign legion, Gurkhas or similar groups and then get back to me with how cushy their position is
Exp since such offer would attract people who already have some military exp. For them it could even be an opportunity to get in a less risky position that they alreay are.
That does not map to how these units are utilised and experienced military personnel would be aware of that
What of I said do you disagree exactly?
That those units would not be harsh and that they would represent less risk then they may already be subjected to
That is preety obv...you can just google how many US casulaites were there in the Iraq war and compare it to the number of casualites on the side of Iraqis.
It is a reality denial if you think the risk they take is comparable.
Your making a generalisation that every units experience is the same which is incorrect
I am making a preety reasonable assumption... but if you disagree you can prove me wrong by showing appropriate statistics, risk analysis etc.
As I’ve mentioned, foreign units are treated much differently than units from home as they are not subjected to the same political pressure to return soldiers to their families
No one is going to use those people as a cannon fodder... not in the current political climate.
I can chase up some stats if you’d like but I do not have them immediately available.
It’s unclear how you believe the current political climate would effect foreign soldiers in the same way that it would when boys from home die
Foreign soldiers have no families in that country nor do they have representatives
FIrst of all it is politically poblematic and such incidents can be used against you by the opposition.
Second of all modern wars aren't thought like that.
There is no political incentive for advocating them and those that are the most ardent supporters of care for refugees and international empathy are the most callous and ardent critics towards the military
Not when it can prove discriminatory treatment.
What would be the political benefit in doing so. Who’s vote does it win?
The soldiers? They can’t vote
The minority vote for example. The liberal vote for exmaple.
Some of them will pass the citizenship sooner or later.
and then they will be able to vote.
It is preety much the same as now
Typically the military has an old boys mentality where if they went through it others should to. It’s often an impediment to cultural change
In any case they would be a very fine minority
also I am not sure if you have any data that shows ethnic composition of French foreign legion and how well they integrate after the service... how well their children integrate etc
and they wouldn't appreciate their comrades being treated as cannon fodder
plus you also have minorities that are already in the contrues of origin
and they will most likely be interested in this
I’m not sure either but I need not limit myself to the legion. Other foreign units exist. Again, those who have earned the citizenship in such a capacity will always be a very slim minority which will call into question the efficacy on spending time chasing such a niche vote. Minorities originating from that country are also unlikely to empathise with those who earn service through citizenship as that service creates a very wide cultural gap and difference in experience. Not to mention the normal tensions between military members and civilians
There is also the point that justified or no, the argument that they knew what they signed up for is persuasive and that’s the cost of getting what they want
I understand if any immigration is undesirable for you that this is not a policy which serves your aims but it is hard to see in what ways you might see this as not a strict improvement over the conventional process
Even accepting your criticism as valid, which clearly I do not, this process creates undoubtably a more thorough process of vetting the commitment of future citizens
There is a lot of assumptions and guesses that don't have a lot back em up here on the other hand are some examples how the media sees minorities in the military: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/study-shoes-black-service-members-punished-more-in-military_us_5938847ce4b0b13f2c66da83?guccounter=1