Ah, invasive extra paperwork (enforced by criminal penalties, at least in theory) for something they say on the surface they won’t actually need. So very german (hah)
Then a month or two before my 18th birthday, I got a postcard saying I had been auto-registered. It was a rather disappointing denouement.
It’s the same reason there is a different legal system in the military than for everyone else.
Sometimes, you need to round up all the men and start killing folks - or everyone else dies. Such is life. Making it easy to find them is a basic operational best practice.
If it hasn’t been used in 50 years, is there some other use for the registry or the organization or why hasn’t this been cut yet?
Informally, it's put forward as one of the most successful government programs in history: it succeeds at all it's objective, comes in at or under budget, employs few people, and avoids the scope creep that kills other successful programs.
It's only shortcoming: it doesn't actually do anything.
The U.S. Army is the permanent, professional standing land force (Regular Army, Reserves, National Guard),
while the Army of the United States (AUS) was a temporary, authorized component used primarily during major wars to rapidly expand forces through draftees and volunteers.
The Selective Service auto-registers people from various data sources.
But this puts me in a weird spot: I've never actually registered. I am registered. But I did not register - which is the requirement.
There are Kafka-esque parts of the US government where this distinction could matter.
https://www.ushmm.org/online/hsv/source_view.php?SourceId=42...
Of course, this is old times now, but here is the same, there is no benefit to register, and you increase your risk to die.
Don't do it.
> very few were able to hide
Not sure what point you are trying to make. Does that justify the law and its consequences? Does that mean people who did not register were doing something wrong or stupid?
First one is definitely true and isn’t emphasized much and tbh I feel like that demand wasn’t unreasonable. Shipping people and things and providing defense would be a lot harder to an exclave than to contiguous territory. They did seriously overreact by invading, of course, and it seems like Mr H had some serious temperamental issues.
Second one I’ve never researched enough to know if it’s true or German propaganda.
I don’t recall the Germans ever claiming that Poland was about to invade them? Maybe I missed it.
Russians talk about further expansion too.
Poland never attacked any country first.
'pesky' it's quite easy the russian point of view !
- and vasac is spreading disinformation accordingly, here on HN.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Poland+ever+attacked+any+country+f...
(downvoted below for calling it: some nonsense propaganda ? - what it is indeed !)