Israel uses Facebook to catch 1,000 draft dodgers

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/22/AR2010112203957.html?tid=nn_twitter

by MarinaMartin • 16 years ago

32 23 16 years ago

I really expected this article to be about photos of these draft dodgers drinking booze, making out with a guy, etc. But updating your Facebook profile on the Sabbath? That's hardcore attention to detail, Israel.

mooism2• 16 years ago

Checking when an update was posted strikes me as being easier to automate than checking photo contents.

cycojesus• 16 years ago

They were exempted from serving in the military on the basis that they're "religiously observant". That excludes using a computer on sabbath and eating in non-kosher restaurants. Lie exposed → Exemption revoked.

scrrr• 16 years ago

Next thing you know they'll post their position to Facebook by accident and opponents will shoot rockets at them.

mhd2• 16 years ago

Couldn't she have hired some gentile to do the typing? Other than the "light a fire" thingy, I can't imagine Facebook being against any "work on the Sabbath" law. I'd actually propose that any minute spent on Facebook counts as some kind of indulgence for the purpose of work (Yes, I know, I'm mixing religions all willy-nilly now).

tkahn64• 16 years ago

Actually that "light a fire thingy" applies to electronics. And for multiple reasons I highly doubt she hired a gentile to update her Facebook status (who would be reading it?).

mhd2• 16 years ago

I know that it applies, so I just wondered (tongue in cheek) whether hiring a shabbos goy for Facebook updates would be, well, kosher.

iwr3• 16 years ago

This may sound harsh, but an army of slaves (i.e. conscripts) is incompatible with a free country. If the citizens can't be mustered to volunteer in its defense, the current state as a social organization becomes obsolete.

Granted, there are many Israelis who would indeed volunteer and militarily, they are not in danger.

tkahn64• 16 years ago

This may be orthogonal to your point, but understand that only the willing actually serve in combat roles.

Granted all go through basic training and then reserve training periodically after they finish their service, but that's because in a time of real existential danger, everyone fights.

idan• 16 years ago

Um, no.

If you are certified as combat-capable, and you are placed with a combat unit, you must go. If you refuse, you go to army jail. Army jail time does not count as service time, so when you get out of army jail, you still have a term of service to complete.

dagw• 16 years ago

The idea behind conscription is not to have an "army of slaves" but to make sure that if you are ever required to muster citizens for your defense, then those citizens will have had at least basic military training and be useful for roles other than bullet magnets.

iwr3• 16 years ago

The greater idea would be that free people should not be forced to go and wage aggressive war. If a political entity decides in favor of war and there is conscription, individuals can't legally refuse if they disagree. Sure, aggressive wars can be waged with professional armies, but then at least there is the possibility of opting out.

In the case of defensive war, there are two options: take refuge or take up arms. Sometimes, the refugee option is better. If you're a married man, your first responsibility should be toward the safety of your family. If that means running away, that is indeed the better option.

Learning to defend oneself and one's family should be a primary responsibility. But I'm not sure the army is the only means to achieve that.

---

As an aside, in a country with conscription there would be no civilians. If all able-bodied men/women are expected to serve in the military, they are fair game according to the rules of war. Conscription is one of the things that makes total war possible. Without conscripts, the war machine will eventually run out of money. With conscripts, the state can wage war up to the point of self-destruction.

johnnygood• 16 years ago

I'm not trying to be harsh on your concept, but if one takes it a little further: "If the citizens can't be mustered to volunteer their taxes. . ."

One of the ideas behind government is that certain situations are prisoner's dilemmas and that a central authority can make sure that the situation comes out equally for all. Rather than having people volunteer taxes, we write laws forcing people to pay them so that some person doesn't get to skip taxes yet get the benefit of the taxes being volunteered by others. Likewise, Israel is compelling their citizens to do military service. Heck, if you're an American male, you were compelled to register for the draft from 18-26 years of age and notify them if you moved residences - under the premise that such registration would make a future draft more equitable.

I'm somewhat just playing devil's advocate here since I tend to think that putting one's life in jeopardy is different from being compelled toward other ends. Would you object as strongly if you were compelled to serve the military, but could choose a non-life-endangering position? Say, IT support? What if the United States compelled people to do Americorps for a year or two after graduation? Does that qualify as slavery?

I guess I'm curious whether your objection is a more libertarian "any time the government compels its citizens, it's a form of slavery" or a life-ethic "when the government forces its citizens against their will to put their life in jeopardy, it's wrong."

JabavuAdams• 16 years ago

There are worse things than putting your own life in jeopardy -- like putting others' lives in jeopardy.

This is not a rebuttal to the bulk of your post.

iwr3• 16 years ago

If the citizens can't be mustered to pay taxes, then that too is a condemnation of the state. Note that countries with high levels of corruption also tend to have high tax evasion among the tax base.

exit• 16 years ago

germany yesterday announced suspension of conscription by July 2011:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/22/germany-abolish-...

"The military was founded in 1955, and conscription – introduced two years later – has been seen as a necessary means to ensure the defence forces maintain a close relationship to civil society in order to prevent a repeat of the way in which the Nazi party was able to manipulate professional soldiers in the 1930s. But experts say it has prevented the military's modernisation."

Israel uses Facebook to catch 1,000 draft dodgers

Related Stories