> Would the citizens of a sovereign nation being forced to violate their Constitution by Putin and Trump be a “violation of human dignity” too?
If Ukraine was worth defending they would have no trouble finding men willing to die to defend it. It’s one of the most corrupt countries in the Western world, its women are being allowed to flee so that they can prostitute themselves to Arabs and Europeans, and it hasn’t had an election in 7 years. Zelensky attempted to take control of the country’s anticorruption bureau in July of 2025: “Many suggest the attempted purges are payback for NABU pursuing charges of illicit enrichment and abuse of office against former deputy prime minister Oleksiy Chernyshov, a key ally for the Office of the President.”[1] In November of 2025, Timur Mindich, a former business partner and close friend of Zelensky, fled to Israel after being accused of orchestrating a kickback operation in cooperation with ministers of Zelensky’s own government. [2][3].
You have the opportunity to go die for these people right now. An increasing number of men in Ukraine have decided they would prefer not to.
> So defeating the Nazis wasn't worth doing, because we had to draft to accomplish it?
What you are implying is that condemning conscription as a violation of human dignity would necessarily lead me to condemn the actions that led to the downfall of a regime that itself engaged in conscription. Your mistake is in thinking that one necessarily follows from the other. I could condemn the specific act of conscription while considering the acts of the Allies in general as morally desirable, I could take a utilitarian approach and say that conscription is infinitely undesirable but the Nazis were infinitely undesirable + 1, or (as is my actual position), I can simply say that both regimes engaged in acts of evil that I am unwilling to dignify by calling “necessary.”
Issues of moral judgement are pass-fail. An act is good or it isn’t. This manner of thinking does not require you to create a gradation between the stranger who tries to rape you and the stranger that tries to kill you; they are both simply behaving immorally. The Rape of Nanjing was wrong; it did not justify the civilian deaths that occurred during the nuclear strikes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
> Wouldn't the alternative be "A violation of human dignity"? Forced confinement in a war zone?
The discussion we are having is operating from the reality that Ukrainian men are being conscripted. If a man can be compelled to serve his country (I reject this premise), it follows that a woman ought to be compelled to serve as well. The conventional justification for exempting women from conscription has been that they are necessary for the nation to reproduce itself. But the majority of these women are not likely to return to Ukraine, so what is the point of treating them any differently from the men if they are already a guaranteed loss?
This is all tangential to the point I was making; you completely ignored the corruption scandals I mentioned.
> You really should make up your mind here.
You’ve been posting here too long to think that this sort of behavior conforms to the site guidelines. I have showed great restraint in writing this reply despite your inconsiderate behavior. My next reminder will not be polite.
> Would the citizens of a sovereign nation being forced to violate their Constitution by Putin and Trump be a “violation of human dignity” too?
You've yet to answer it.
> This is all tangential to the point I was making; you completely ignored the corruption scandals I mentioned.
Yes, I ignored the blatant dodge attempt to drag things off-topic.
> You’ve been posting here too long to think that this sort of behavior conforms to the site guidelines. I have showed great restraint in writing this reply despite your inconsiderate behavior. My next reminder will not be polite.
Pick "tutting schoolmarm" or "internet tough guy". Both in one paragraph just looks silly.
What does the Iranian say? If we're all about respecting documents, we should make sure we assess them all equally. The U.S. constitution has a lot to say about many of the things that are happening right now, but those are being happily ignored. We can't even respect our own constitution, the idea that we'd respect others is laughable.
How do you even securely hold an election during a full scale war? Thousands are outside the country or on the front lines. You'd also be creating huge targets at polling stations. Luckily their constitution recognises it's a bad idea to try.
