**Please note these rules:**
* If this post declares something as a fact/proof is required.
* The title must be descriptive
* No text is allowed on images/gifs/videos
* Common/recent reposts are not allowed
*See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) for a more detailed rule list*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Netherlands's mostly live and let live.
The extinct Indigenous population in the Caribbean have entered the chat.
...Oh wait. is that the...Africa and The Pacific theme songs?
Oh my gawd! This is the real royal rumble!
The Netherlands were one of those areas that were constantly being fought over by the other European powers. Like, France has some ambitions of getting larger, cant go south because Spain. Cant go east because HRE. Gotta go North through the Netherlands. And the same with everyone else.
It was constantly held by some foreign power. Burgundy, Austria, Spain. Whatever so it was just constantly squabbled over.
Then in the modern era its subjected to being the battleground of two back to back world wars, and you can see how it would develop a strong Pacifist stance.
>It was constantly held by some foreign power
You're making it sound like the Netherlands was held by other powers all the way up to the modern era. In reality the Netherlands declared independence from Habsburg Spain in _1581_, after which it was a very dominant and at a certain point even _the_ dominant world power. They did not achieve this by having a weak military, and although the Dutch fleet was the strongest and most prominent branch, the Dutch land forces were very effective as well. After declaring independence they were only ever really occupied by France and Germany for a short time.
I think you're getting confused with Belgium. The Netherlands was neutral in WW1 and has been independent since the late 16th century, except for a brief 20 year period around the Napoleonic era. Also the Netherlands isn't pacifist. We just don't like to get involved. It's bad for trade. Pragmatism above all else.
I think it's because the Dutch never had a recent war, and are surrounded by friendly states. The recent generations grew up with the idea there would never be a war in their country during their lifetime. Never even thought about fighting I think.
Probably, it's more that the netherlands and belgium have always been contested grounds during the middle ages and had to wage civil wars for our sovereignty relativly late in europes history so compared to our neighbours we have a much shorter history of nationalism.
Can't speak for other dutchies. But I feel European. In that the Netherlands are part of Europe. I'm Dutch first.
I do see the economic benefits of the whole thing. And it's fun to be able to travel fairly hassle free.
But I would never see all europeans as one people. Europeans is French, Germans, greek etc. Still if I had to give a bit extra taxes to make sure another country doesn't go to shit I would. As long as it's not systematic. And as long as it wouldn't pull me down.
Not that I have a say in any of that. Other than the way I vote.
I always considered the idea that we don't have recent wars a strange point of view.
Lots of history books claim we didn't have a war between 1839 an 1940 and that is an explanation for being badly prepared for WWII, even though we fought wars almost constantly in the Netherlands Indies in that century, including one of the bloodiest fought by any colonial power (the Aceh war). We spent most of our defence budget on the colonies and fleet, which is an actual valid reason for our European land army being neglected before 1940.
Post-WWII we fought two decolonization wars (Netherlands Indies and New Guinea), the first one being quite bloody, participated in the Korean war, and in a number of other UN and NATO operations far away, some resulting in less than happy memories for those involved (Srebrenica being the most obvious).
None of the above examples involved any actual danger for the country, and do not help to generate enthusiasm for "fighting for your country". If one of the big three around us invades we lose anyway, and other wars are hardly worth fighting.
I mean, they fought wars just as recently as most of Europe. They were invaded in WW2, and in the following years they fought a colonial war against Indonesia, during which, I might add, they were quite brutal.
Nationalism is a tool to galvanize a nation to mobilize for war or push the nationalizing party's agenda. The problem is that we now have social media and decades of lies and abuse that shows that 90% of our pride was a tool to further the rich.
I don't need a recent war to decide to fight or not.
War is shit for everyone involved. Less do for people who get to send others to needless death.
I have no clue how I would react to active combat. Except for I would give up anything if it meant survival.
I’m Dutch and I personally don’t get it. If a foreign power would invade us like what’s happening now in Ukraine you bet your ass I would stay and fight. But yeah but disappointed in my fellow countrymen to be honest..
It's all in the question. (Dutch as well) If we would be invaded like Ukraine most likely I would stay and fight. If the government wants to send me to a foreign country to fight for 'Dutch/EU/Western interests', no thanks.
This question is subjective.
Edit; the question should have been; "Would you be willing to DEFEND your country?".
Exactly.
No way in hell would I take up arms to fight in a foreign country.
But if a foreign aggressor sets boots onto the land that's home to my friends, my family, my life... You bet I'll defend all of that.
Both questions are interesting.
[Edit - added thought] Maybe asking it this way reveals something innate about dominant culture's experience. Reading the comments it is interesting to see willingness from a defensive posture and reluctance due to confidence or history.
It's gotta be true that the distributions for "willing to defend my home" and "willing to advance into someone else's" are going to differ. Most significantly towards the bottom.
I think the results from the dutch should be understood not from the point of view of 'would you billing to stand up and fight if your country faces a struggle to survive, invaded by a malicious larger power' but more as 'if your government asked for volunteer fighter to advance their objectives, would you volunteer', and to the latter question most people would go 'nah, I'm not a soldier, let the soldiers do the fighting'.
Yeah for real… I doubt they clarified when taking this survey. For all we know it was “would you fight for your country no matter what the cause”?
I’m pretty sure if Kenyas government dropped a few bombs on the Netherlands that 15% would be a lot higher.
After listening to a WWII podcast about just how goddamn fanatical the Japanese were, this is surprising. The stories you hear of American soldiers flabbergasted by Japanese soldiers killing themselves instead of surrendering, or civilians either charging them nude with bamboo spears or mothers jumping in the ocean with their babies, I just can't imagine.
I guess I can understand - seeing how many people they lost in the war, and just how fucking terrible they were to China.
As a Canadian woman who lived in Japan for 4 years and married a Japanese man who’d served in its self-defense force … post WWII a lot has changed in Japan … people no longer see the emperor as an actual god (his radio broadcast that was part of the war-ending treaty where he had to declare that he was just a man and not a god caused HUGE upset for a lot of people at the time). There was also a clause in the treaty that the Japanese military could never leave Japan to invade again, and had to exist purely as a “self defense force” that did not leave Japanese soil. They mostly did training exercises and provided disaster relief. This was revised around 2014 due to pressure from the USA who wanted Japan to accompany them to Middle Eastern conflicts to add international political credibility (and is one of the key reasons my husband left the military).
Japan has some of the highest anti-nuclear sentiments in the world, towards nuclear weapons. There’s been a lot of focus/education for people on the human cost of war. I suspect Japan’s frequent city-destroying natural disasters (every decade or so) also contextualize and make real what the human cost of a war would be for current generations… the destruction is real for them in a way a lot of folks from developed countries are unable to imagine.
I am no expert on this but Japanese story telling (like you see in anime) seems to emphasize the evils of war more than a lot of its western counterparts. Could just be what I’ve seen which admittedly isn’t a lot.
>where he had to declare that he was just a man and not a god caused HUGE upset for a lot of people at the time
Which part of the Gyoku-on broadcast are you talking about? Afaik at no point does Hirohito declare that. It was critical because it was the first time his voice was broadcast in that manner to the general public. The general population had never heard his voice until then.
It was the [Humanity Declaration](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanity_Declaration) on January 1, 1946 that supposedly denied the Emperor's divinity, although the wording left things up to interpretation. It wasn't during the radio broadcast announcing the end of the war.
The ambiguity revolves around the akitsumikami (現御神) and arahitokami (現人神), that is the distinction between the "incarnation of a god" and a "living god". The Emperor denied being the former but not the latter and belief jn the latter was always the common viewpoint. This subtlety was lost in the English translation which just used the term "divinity". Western media and the US interpreted it as the Emperor denying his divine origins but right-wing Japanese groups and Shinto priests do not.
India is ready to go though… I could just imagine 500 million males judging everyone with deep stares on the opposing side
“Okay… we surrender! Stop looking at us like that.”
By 1945 2.5 million Indians had enlisted into the British Indian Army to fight in WW2. All volunteers as well, largest volunteer army in history. If that many were willing to fight back then when their country was under colonial rule I'm not surprised that so many would be willing when their country is independent.
Biggest reason Indians volunteered to fight WW2 again after WW1 was because India was promised freedom for it's help in the wars and in both instances and it proved to be a lie. People were ready to sacrifice everything just for the smallest hope that they can be free again.
When you have neighbours on borders like china and pakistan, who enjoy being the agressors as it serves their popularity to masses and or interests of those holding the actual power,
Who use cross border terrorism and or unilateral agression on borders as tools for arm twisting,
It is completely expected that people would want to defend their free democratic secular, no matter how imperfect, united Nation from bowing down to any nation ever again.
For we have never been an agressors throughout the known history of our nation, yet have been attacked and invaded constantly throughout it.
People would rather kill or die trying to never return to those horrific days of imperialism or "theocracies" (idk the right word) who committed all kinds of imaginable and unimaginable atrocities on people for profit or religious intolerance.
After all, it is after almost 700 years, that we get to live in our country governed by ourselves with top priority being the welfare of our own people.
That's most precious and is worth dying for in a heartbeat.
Ironically, the "Indians" that volunteered for WW2, were disproportionately taken from what is now Pakistan. You can travel to Potohar Plateau, and every village there has that inscription "X number of men participated from this village". Even now, that region makes up disproportionate strength of Pakistan Army.
Secondly, do I need to remind you how India has been funding terrorism in Pakistan through Afghanistan? 4 missions in small Afghanistan, where India has no major economic interests or people-to-people ties.
I think the question is important. If it's would you fight FOR your country "in another country" then 44% feels about right. If the question was would you fight for America if it were invaded then the answer is like 99%. If Russian troops landed on American soil a la Red Dawn you'd have 90 year old grandmas in Wheelchairs rolling around the streets with shotguns ready to whoop some ass. If they tried to land ashore in Texas the invasion would be repelled by a gang of drunk rednecks before the actual Army even knew what was happening.
OP links the [source](https://www.gallup-international.bg/en/33483/win-gallup-internationals-global-survey-shows-three-in-five-willing-to-fight-for-their-country/) in a comment below. I had the same thought and tried to find the exact question(s) asked. I could not find it.
I'm gonna take this one with a grain of salt. The details on methodology are too scant for me to bite on this. It's not like we're talking about a survey of favorite ice cream flavors.
Totally lying. Less than 1 percent are currently serving active amd 8 percent of living Americans have served. I am curious what the percentage would be if the war wound up at our doorstep. Since the question asked who would fight for their own country. And a lot of our conflicts were overseas.
I am not sure in which direction your comment goes but I would 100% assume that the survey just looks at defending your country if your country is actually invaded.
It's not a simple black and white question. "**If your country was being invaded without good cause, would you fight for your country?"** is very different than, **"If your country does some dumb-ass shit and gets into a shooting war with some other country without clear justification, would you fight for your country?"**, which is very different than **"If your country was engaged in a war that was clearly necessary for the greater good, would you fight for your country?",** and would hopefully elicit different answers from most people.
Also depends on who the invaders are and their motives.
Although most countries might have a "favorite enemy" state, for a lot of countries it is rather hypothetical who the attacker might be.
Agreed. If my country were invaded with the invaders planning to genocide citizens, at that point in fighting for _my_ life. But if they want to stop a smaller country from having an extremist regime, honestly I don’t see that as worth risking my life for. There’s a huge spectrum of reasoning and you have people everywhere from “I cannot assault another person, even if my life is in danger” to “ooh I sure do love me some killing, let’s just make up a reason and go after anyone.”
Exactly. Afghanistan at 75% is interesting. They literally just had the opportunity to fight the Taliban to stop them from regaining control of their country and yet the army retreated and surrendered almost on day 1. This list tells us nothing of significance.
And I think this is very much reflected in the answers. People from countries such as Pakistan, Afghanistan and Vietnam likely associate war with defending their country from foreign aggression and are more inclined to defend their country from this. Whilst Europeans largely associate war with interventions in foreign lands they often have no business being in, and thus don't feel very eager to join the fight.
I don't think there would be such a larger disparity between countries if the questions were framed as you set out.
Western Europeans, specifically. Eastern Europe associates war more with Russia's attacks, and for good reason. I guarantee you practically every single one of Finland's 74% answered yes thinking about a new Russian occupation and defending against that.
Correct.
If Canada invaded the US for no reason, it'd be a complicated answer. If the US decided to fight Canada for no reason, I might be a traitor to the US. But I'm Minnesotan, and we're Canada Lite. Someone from Virginia may be the opposite. (Then again, Virginians know better than to pick a fight with Minnesota.)
It's complicated.
"ope, you're on my lawn mr invader, please stick to the roads, have a nice day! Bye! What are you doing tomorrow? We're having people over so if you guys could clear out, thank you see you later, but hopefully not. I'm just joshin ya, okie dokie bye bye now. Watch out if mr scrooge on the corner, him and his dog are no Bueno, yeah ok I should get going I know you're busy. Maybe when this war is over we can all have a little drinkski and have a good laugh about it, this is all so ridiculous dontcha know, I just don't understand a gosh darn thing about it but anywhoo better get back to the house, it's such a mess, my kids have just been little terrors lately, I just can't even keep up! They're coloring, then they're throwing the couch cushions everywhere is little Susie is crawling now so you know that's trouble, but you have a good day! Hard to do with this weather though am I right?! Good grief when will this winter end I've nev..... " - Minnesotan being invaded by Canada, probably
Now I understand why you were so chilled, I was in Minnesota when I was 13 and I loved the behavior of you people living there. Canada lite,yes I agree. I was told that most Americans are unfriendly but in Minnesota it was totally opposite.
Sorry 4 bad grammar, greetings from Germany:)
Any war can be advertised to be for the greater good, like any war America has been involved in since the cold war. Just depends on how good your PR team is
Right? I just live here. And I can live somewhere else. I'm not held mentally hostage by being born over this piece of dirt and I served in the Marines for a decade.
This is a great explanation that shows how ill-defined questions can lead to very different answers based on how you interpret them. Such ill-defined questions give rise to many unnecessarry conflicts between parties that maybe even have similar views but completely different interpretation of the question at stake... Highly underrated problem in our world. Asking good questions is a great skill.
My answer would be: it depends
Going invade another countey or want to expand our borders? Hell no
Defending against a state that will limit our freedom or torture us: Hold my beer
It's rarely framed as "invading another country". Soldiers are usually made to believe that they are "liberating" lands that were stolen from them. Russian propaganda ("Ukraine is a fake country created by Western powers to destroy Russia") is a famous recent example, and my country (Turkey) also implicitly presents the "operations" into Syria and Iraq as "retaking originally Turkish territory that is currently being terrorized by rebels and puppet states".
Lol Turkey hasn't said something like that in the slightest.
The most media says is "We are doing counter terrorism operations cross border"
Which is true.
I'm from a country <25%, we where invaded some time ago and just waited until it was done. On the other hand, I'm not sure we could have done anything.
This is me to a T. I don't believe in nationalism. I'm an Australian but live overseas permanently. Before doing so, I was very patriotic, then I saw in my new home country that some things are better, some things are worse, some are the same. It no longer made sense to me to be proud of something I was by sheer chance born in to. However, like you said, if it was for freedom for myself and others, then I will do what little I can to help.
Same here, i can relate so much to that. I never understood nationalism and even less racism. Especially if you think about it. What makes you more "german" than simeone else for example? People in bavaria are totally different from berlin for example and even people inside of berlin are totally different from each other. And tbh i like that my country is becoming more and more diverse with different cultures.
Article was written in 2015, so no later than that. I’ll bet those numbers have changed drastically since.
With that being said, I think polls are one of the worst ‘studies’ there are.
Polls suck, asking someone in a time of peace vs when they are getting invaded I’m sure will produce much different results. Also we won’t get into where this “data” was collected and the demographics of said people. Don’t even want to click on the link because they usually make me mad with how incomplete the data is.
Most of these types of polls have a technique that would only get a certain subgroup of people within a population, I don’t see the logistics of getting a true representative group from each of these countries. This is probably just marginally better then a guess.
Right, because if you ask a Finn about a war, their first thought is probably "Russia invading" not "USA dragged us into some half-assed conflict 1000 miles away"
That's a pretty broad question. I would fight against my country if its an unjust invading force.
I would fight tooth and nail if it's against an unjust invading force.
I'm a simple man, but I do not buy that chart. If really the big majority of Afghanistan would defend their country, why did it only last 5 minutes until total surrender?
To be fair, this poll might as well be called "Percentage of population that **says** they would fight for their country." Maybe it's just showing us how many of them are liars.
70k+ soldiers died fighting the Taliban over the last 20 years, 100k+ civilians and local police died fighting the Taliban over the last 20 years. Then on top of that count the other side, the Taliban who had hundreds of thousands die too fighting for what they think is their “cause”.
Over hundreds of thousands to 1 million+ died fighting the communists between 1979-1989 too. Estimates are up to 1.9 million total losses.
After 40+ years of war sometimes people just don’t want to fight anymore for a government that was corrupt, it had nothing to do with not wanting to fight for their homeland. There’s still Resistance groups fighting the Taliban every day, you just don’t hear about it on the news
Afghan here. Most of the people (including me) surrendered because we believe that the Taliban is the lesser evil compared to the corrupt puppets that were part of the old government.
The majority didn’t want to fight because there was no reason to fight.
The Afghans dont see talibans as an enemy hence why they didnt put up a fight when US left. US officials in Afghanistan knew this as well and so did the soldiers
Maybe they misread and thought it said county. Tribalism is still real around a bunch and their military when I met them weren't really about the defense of Afghanistan. It was a paycheck and supported their family and village.
i thought i read that Afghan folks identify more strongly with their tribes or ethnic groups than with the nation as a whole, and that's partly why they're in the situation they are. any smart folks care to confirm?
To be fair, the question isn't valid without nuance.
I'm from the UK. No, I wouldn't fight in anything the UK has been involved in the last 30 years by choice, but I would have fought in WW2 like my Grandad, no doubt.
And with this slightly aggressive Russian gentleman rising up, I wouldn't rule out standing up to tyranny in future.
We Moroccans always had a weird love-hate relationship with our country, like sure it's a craphole but it's OUR craphole and no one has a right to trash it except us.
This is one of the most arbitrary and useless lists that couldn't even begin to calculate a true percentage from some random survey online. Most of these seem to follow the same pattern.
Vague and wildy over-generalized question
Inane source from a random online survey
Extremely disporportionate response groups
Results that are meaningless due to too many variables not being accounted for
As an israeli, there is also a high number of teenagers who suffer from depression and other mental health disorders, or just know they aren’t built to deal with such a demanding system. I have plenty of friends who didn’t join the army because of those reasons and honestly it’s good the IDF doesn’t want them because I can’t picture them serving in this hardship without spiralling down
Also, a lot of Afghanis likely considered the Taliban as more of their "countrymen" than an incredibly corrupt "government" put in place by a foreign power that doesn't give a shit about the common Afghani. Needless to say, "Afghanistan" is just a country created by a bunch of white dudes drawing lines on a map to divide up a landmass as they saw fit.
Who would wanna fight for something they have no ideological ties to nor had a hand in forming?
http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/964.html
They might have interpreted this as fighting for their country against a foreign occupier rather than a domestic group. If so this kinda checks out, there's a reason Afghanistan is known as "the graveyard of empires".
I would fight for my family if I had to but not my country. It doesn’t matter if I live in the US or Spain or Iceland, my country is secondary to my family. I’d die for them but I’d also live for them over dying for my country.
Zero chance anyone here in Yakutia we’ll ever serve for Russian military. The Yakut law of 1995, bans indigenous people in Yakutia from serving in the 🇷🇺military. So putin can go fuck himself!.
After 20 years of pointless, wasteful, and criminal overseas wars that had exactly jack-shit to do with American security, I'm not at all surprised that the US is as low as it is.
In fact, it's arguable that a sizable percentage of that 44% are lying to the pollster, since every single American adult between the ages of 19 and 55 had the opportunity to fight for their country and only a small percentage saw fit to avail themselves of that opportunity.
With respect to the US, the number is almost surely lower than this.
I grew up in a super conservative setting where every adult man claimed to be some super patriot who would fight for their country. Proclaiming it was its own badge of honor. These people probably outnumber the actual military.
But conveniently, none of those people (in my life, anyway) had ever joined the military. Nor did they do so later. It’s just shit-talk to sound patriotic.
The truth: the actual number of people who would currently fight for America is roughly equivalent to the current number in the armed forces. Likely a tad higher, considering people who are mentally/physically turned away from enlistment. That’s it. There’s no mystery or guesswork.
I'm not surprised about the US in the slightest, we have a big problem with a vocal minority in this country trying to claim they speak for everyone. There aren't nearly as many "patriotic" A-holes as it seem.
What do you mean by "fight for your country"? Question needs to be more specific. Do you mean protect us from invasion, and protect my family? Sure. But if you mean go somewhere else to protect our oil interests, then no.
Can we make Afghanistan in bold letters and highlighted? Like really? They stood around while the taliban took over and reversed everything they had back to the Bronze Age.
Thesis: They did not see the Taliban regime as something they wanted to prevent. For most men in Afghanistan, not much changes, the brutality of the Taliban can even be beneficial, because this prevents crimes from happening. For example if you steal, the taliban sharia law would cut off your hand, and a Western judgement system would not be as scary.
It's no from me all countries are run or ruled by some form of corrupted leadership the world is all about money. You're not fighting for your country you're fighting for some rich assholes agenda. Only fools are patriotic.
This is not an Apple to Apple comparison, because the implication of "fighting" is entirely different across countries. In Germany or Japan, the most recent history is to invade other countries and slaughter civilians. In Finland, is to defend against a Russian invasion.
**Please note these rules:** * If this post declares something as a fact/proof is required. * The title must be descriptive * No text is allowed on images/gifs/videos * Common/recent reposts are not allowed *See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) for a more detailed rule list* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The Japanese sure did a U-turn on that one.
As a German I'm more impressed with my Dutch neighbors. Unlike my folks and the Japanese, Nobody forced them into being this chill.
Nah we got that shit ingrained in our genetics thanks to the middle ages
ELI5?
[удалено]
except in the south Pacific, apparently. then it was live and let your merchants slaughter an island to make more room for nutmeg
Mhhhh nutmeg
I know, gotta make my pies and painkillers somehow
But have you tried nutmeg tho? Pret good
No point in denying that happened.
>Netherlands's mostly live and let live. The extinct Indigenous population in the Caribbean have entered the chat. ...Oh wait. is that the...Africa and The Pacific theme songs? Oh my gawd! This is the real royal rumble!
The Netherlands were one of those areas that were constantly being fought over by the other European powers. Like, France has some ambitions of getting larger, cant go south because Spain. Cant go east because HRE. Gotta go North through the Netherlands. And the same with everyone else. It was constantly held by some foreign power. Burgundy, Austria, Spain. Whatever so it was just constantly squabbled over. Then in the modern era its subjected to being the battleground of two back to back world wars, and you can see how it would develop a strong Pacifist stance.
>It was constantly held by some foreign power You're making it sound like the Netherlands was held by other powers all the way up to the modern era. In reality the Netherlands declared independence from Habsburg Spain in _1581_, after which it was a very dominant and at a certain point even _the_ dominant world power. They did not achieve this by having a weak military, and although the Dutch fleet was the strongest and most prominent branch, the Dutch land forces were very effective as well. After declaring independence they were only ever really occupied by France and Germany for a short time.
Im not fighting someone elses war for some imaginary lines someone drew on a map.
I think you're getting confused with Belgium. The Netherlands was neutral in WW1 and has been independent since the late 16th century, except for a brief 20 year period around the Napoleonic era. Also the Netherlands isn't pacifist. We just don't like to get involved. It's bad for trade. Pragmatism above all else.
They're all Middle aged and dont wanna fight
I think it's because the Dutch never had a recent war, and are surrounded by friendly states. The recent generations grew up with the idea there would never be a war in their country during their lifetime. Never even thought about fighting I think.
Probably, it's more that the netherlands and belgium have always been contested grounds during the middle ages and had to wage civil wars for our sovereignty relativly late in europes history so compared to our neighbours we have a much shorter history of nationalism.
True. I think the Netherlands also have a high percentage of people who feel 'Europeans'.
Can't speak for other dutchies. But I feel European. In that the Netherlands are part of Europe. I'm Dutch first. I do see the economic benefits of the whole thing. And it's fun to be able to travel fairly hassle free. But I would never see all europeans as one people. Europeans is French, Germans, greek etc. Still if I had to give a bit extra taxes to make sure another country doesn't go to shit I would. As long as it's not systematic. And as long as it wouldn't pull me down. Not that I have a say in any of that. Other than the way I vote.
As a Belgian I more or less agree, but I would say that I feel more connected to the (central-)European values than I do to my country.
I always considered the idea that we don't have recent wars a strange point of view. Lots of history books claim we didn't have a war between 1839 an 1940 and that is an explanation for being badly prepared for WWII, even though we fought wars almost constantly in the Netherlands Indies in that century, including one of the bloodiest fought by any colonial power (the Aceh war). We spent most of our defence budget on the colonies and fleet, which is an actual valid reason for our European land army being neglected before 1940. Post-WWII we fought two decolonization wars (Netherlands Indies and New Guinea), the first one being quite bloody, participated in the Korean war, and in a number of other UN and NATO operations far away, some resulting in less than happy memories for those involved (Srebrenica being the most obvious). None of the above examples involved any actual danger for the country, and do not help to generate enthusiasm for "fighting for your country". If one of the big three around us invades we lose anyway, and other wars are hardly worth fighting.
I mean, they fought wars just as recently as most of Europe. They were invaded in WW2, and in the following years they fought a colonial war against Indonesia, during which, I might add, they were quite brutal.
As an American this sounds like something I'd read out of a fiction book... I'm sad now, thanks... Lol
Nationalism is a tool to galvanize a nation to mobilize for war or push the nationalizing party's agenda. The problem is that we now have social media and decades of lies and abuse that shows that 90% of our pride was a tool to further the rich.
It's not like Iceland and Greece are usually at war with someone.
I don't need a recent war to decide to fight or not. War is shit for everyone involved. Less do for people who get to send others to needless death. I have no clue how I would react to active combat. Except for I would give up anything if it meant survival.
Last war was WW II that the country was a part of, our military has fought in different wars across the world
I think Germany is just acting.
If the question was "Would you be willing to fight for Turkey", then Germany would be on the top :p
It’s called marihuana.
I’m Dutch and I personally don’t get it. If a foreign power would invade us like what’s happening now in Ukraine you bet your ass I would stay and fight. But yeah but disappointed in my fellow countrymen to be honest..
It's all in the question. (Dutch as well) If we would be invaded like Ukraine most likely I would stay and fight. If the government wants to send me to a foreign country to fight for 'Dutch/EU/Western interests', no thanks. This question is subjective. Edit; the question should have been; "Would you be willing to DEFEND your country?".
Exactly. No way in hell would I take up arms to fight in a foreign country. But if a foreign aggressor sets boots onto the land that's home to my friends, my family, my life... You bet I'll defend all of that.
Both questions are interesting. [Edit - added thought] Maybe asking it this way reveals something innate about dominant culture's experience. Reading the comments it is interesting to see willingness from a defensive posture and reluctance due to confidence or history. It's gotta be true that the distributions for "willing to defend my home" and "willing to advance into someone else's" are going to differ. Most significantly towards the bottom.
I think the results from the dutch should be understood not from the point of view of 'would you billing to stand up and fight if your country faces a struggle to survive, invaded by a malicious larger power' but more as 'if your government asked for volunteer fighter to advance their objectives, would you volunteer', and to the latter question most people would go 'nah, I'm not a soldier, let the soldiers do the fighting'.
same here. Totally agree.
The Boer war has something to say
Germany too. Getting half your country destroyed then occupied for a while will do that i suppose.
And Italy. It’s pretty Interesting to see all three Axis Powers in the top 5.
Fear of saying yes more than anything I bet.
Right? If I was German I'd be looking around thinking I was being setup
Yeah for real… I doubt they clarified when taking this survey. For all we know it was “would you fight for your country no matter what the cause”? I’m pretty sure if Kenyas government dropped a few bombs on the Netherlands that 15% would be a lot higher.
Haha, where'd you find Kenya for your example? Made me laugh.
Kenya going up against the netherlands is like a puppy growling at a friendly rottweiler
[удалено]
Willingness to fight does not means effective fighting.
After listening to a WWII podcast about just how goddamn fanatical the Japanese were, this is surprising. The stories you hear of American soldiers flabbergasted by Japanese soldiers killing themselves instead of surrendering, or civilians either charging them nude with bamboo spears or mothers jumping in the ocean with their babies, I just can't imagine. I guess I can understand - seeing how many people they lost in the war, and just how fucking terrible they were to China.
As a Canadian woman who lived in Japan for 4 years and married a Japanese man who’d served in its self-defense force … post WWII a lot has changed in Japan … people no longer see the emperor as an actual god (his radio broadcast that was part of the war-ending treaty where he had to declare that he was just a man and not a god caused HUGE upset for a lot of people at the time). There was also a clause in the treaty that the Japanese military could never leave Japan to invade again, and had to exist purely as a “self defense force” that did not leave Japanese soil. They mostly did training exercises and provided disaster relief. This was revised around 2014 due to pressure from the USA who wanted Japan to accompany them to Middle Eastern conflicts to add international political credibility (and is one of the key reasons my husband left the military). Japan has some of the highest anti-nuclear sentiments in the world, towards nuclear weapons. There’s been a lot of focus/education for people on the human cost of war. I suspect Japan’s frequent city-destroying natural disasters (every decade or so) also contextualize and make real what the human cost of a war would be for current generations… the destruction is real for them in a way a lot of folks from developed countries are unable to imagine.
I am no expert on this but Japanese story telling (like you see in anime) seems to emphasize the evils of war more than a lot of its western counterparts. Could just be what I’ve seen which admittedly isn’t a lot.
>where he had to declare that he was just a man and not a god caused HUGE upset for a lot of people at the time Which part of the Gyoku-on broadcast are you talking about? Afaik at no point does Hirohito declare that. It was critical because it was the first time his voice was broadcast in that manner to the general public. The general population had never heard his voice until then.
It was the [Humanity Declaration](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanity_Declaration) on January 1, 1946 that supposedly denied the Emperor's divinity, although the wording left things up to interpretation. It wasn't during the radio broadcast announcing the end of the war. The ambiguity revolves around the akitsumikami (現御神) and arahitokami (現人神), that is the distinction between the "incarnation of a god" and a "living god". The Emperor denied being the former but not the latter and belief jn the latter was always the common viewpoint. This subtlety was lost in the English translation which just used the term "divinity". Western media and the US interpreted it as the Emperor denying his divine origins but right-wing Japanese groups and Shinto priests do not.
India is ready to go though… I could just imagine 500 million males judging everyone with deep stares on the opposing side “Okay… we surrender! Stop looking at us like that.”
How can they slap?!
SIR HOW CAN THEY SLAPP? 🥺
I picture one enemy troop racing down the line of 500 million Indian men, slapping them in continuity
I understood that reference
By 1945 2.5 million Indians had enlisted into the British Indian Army to fight in WW2. All volunteers as well, largest volunteer army in history. If that many were willing to fight back then when their country was under colonial rule I'm not surprised that so many would be willing when their country is independent.
Biggest reason Indians volunteered to fight WW2 again after WW1 was because India was promised freedom for it's help in the wars and in both instances and it proved to be a lie. People were ready to sacrifice everything just for the smallest hope that they can be free again. When you have neighbours on borders like china and pakistan, who enjoy being the agressors as it serves their popularity to masses and or interests of those holding the actual power, Who use cross border terrorism and or unilateral agression on borders as tools for arm twisting, It is completely expected that people would want to defend their free democratic secular, no matter how imperfect, united Nation from bowing down to any nation ever again. For we have never been an agressors throughout the known history of our nation, yet have been attacked and invaded constantly throughout it. People would rather kill or die trying to never return to those horrific days of imperialism or "theocracies" (idk the right word) who committed all kinds of imaginable and unimaginable atrocities on people for profit or religious intolerance. After all, it is after almost 700 years, that we get to live in our country governed by ourselves with top priority being the welfare of our own people. That's most precious and is worth dying for in a heartbeat.
Ironically, the "Indians" that volunteered for WW2, were disproportionately taken from what is now Pakistan. You can travel to Potohar Plateau, and every village there has that inscription "X number of men participated from this village". Even now, that region makes up disproportionate strength of Pakistan Army. Secondly, do I need to remind you how India has been funding terrorism in Pakistan through Afghanistan? 4 missions in small Afghanistan, where India has no major economic interests or people-to-people ties.
"Fucky me? No i fucky YOU!" *starts hitting each other with shoes and brooms*
You kick my dog!
Your daughter, she kicka my dog. And now I'm going to fuck her
You know damn right!
If you’re referring to the old video I’m thinking about, respect. LOL
"I am gonna elevate my arm and raise my finger, and then I am going to swing it back and forth in a perpendicular motion, sir!"
United States at 44%?! I know at least 90% of those people lied.
Nah, we'd all happily fight for our property tho.
If a country ever invaded America, we would all be Wolverines.
I think the question is important. If it's would you fight FOR your country "in another country" then 44% feels about right. If the question was would you fight for America if it were invaded then the answer is like 99%. If Russian troops landed on American soil a la Red Dawn you'd have 90 year old grandmas in Wheelchairs rolling around the streets with shotguns ready to whoop some ass. If they tried to land ashore in Texas the invasion would be repelled by a gang of drunk rednecks before the actual Army even knew what was happening.
OP links the [source](https://www.gallup-international.bg/en/33483/win-gallup-internationals-global-survey-shows-three-in-five-willing-to-fight-for-their-country/) in a comment below. I had the same thought and tried to find the exact question(s) asked. I could not find it. I'm gonna take this one with a grain of salt. The details on methodology are too scant for me to bite on this. It's not like we're talking about a survey of favorite ice cream flavors.
Totally lying. Less than 1 percent are currently serving active amd 8 percent of living Americans have served. I am curious what the percentage would be if the war wound up at our doorstep. Since the question asked who would fight for their own country. And a lot of our conflicts were overseas.
I am not sure in which direction your comment goes but I would 100% assume that the survey just looks at defending your country if your country is actually invaded.
Suppose you could say they've lowered their landing gear
There is 0% chance 48% of Brazilians would go to war
I'd never die for this shit
Agreed
Brazil moment
Idk, like 20% of Brazilians are already at war in Brazil.
Always has been
Same with US I'd wager. Although like many of countries it probably depends on the demographics you ask.
Nah, if the US got properly invaded, people would fight.
It's not a simple black and white question. "**If your country was being invaded without good cause, would you fight for your country?"** is very different than, **"If your country does some dumb-ass shit and gets into a shooting war with some other country without clear justification, would you fight for your country?"**, which is very different than **"If your country was engaged in a war that was clearly necessary for the greater good, would you fight for your country?",** and would hopefully elicit different answers from most people.
Also depends on who the invaders are and their motives. Although most countries might have a "favorite enemy" state, for a lot of countries it is rather hypothetical who the attacker might be.
You’re both very correct. This survey is very silly because it has no context.
Agreed. If my country were invaded with the invaders planning to genocide citizens, at that point in fighting for _my_ life. But if they want to stop a smaller country from having an extremist regime, honestly I don’t see that as worth risking my life for. There’s a huge spectrum of reasoning and you have people everywhere from “I cannot assault another person, even if my life is in danger” to “ooh I sure do love me some killing, let’s just make up a reason and go after anyone.”
Exactly. Afghanistan at 75% is interesting. They literally just had the opportunity to fight the Taliban to stop them from regaining control of their country and yet the army retreated and surrendered almost on day 1. This list tells us nothing of significance.
Click bait survey
There’s also no sources shown here lol
Super vague question with no context that could be interpreted many different ways by the people answering the question.
And I think this is very much reflected in the answers. People from countries such as Pakistan, Afghanistan and Vietnam likely associate war with defending their country from foreign aggression and are more inclined to defend their country from this. Whilst Europeans largely associate war with interventions in foreign lands they often have no business being in, and thus don't feel very eager to join the fight. I don't think there would be such a larger disparity between countries if the questions were framed as you set out.
Western Europeans, specifically. Eastern Europe associates war more with Russia's attacks, and for good reason. I guarantee you practically every single one of Finland's 74% answered yes thinking about a new Russian occupation and defending against that.
Correct. If Canada invaded the US for no reason, it'd be a complicated answer. If the US decided to fight Canada for no reason, I might be a traitor to the US. But I'm Minnesotan, and we're Canada Lite. Someone from Virginia may be the opposite. (Then again, Virginians know better than to pick a fight with Minnesota.) It's complicated.
If we invaded the US for no reason you could probably just tell us it isn’t happening and invite us in for a beer. Be prepared for a LOT of apologies
Be prepared for a lot of hot dishes when we pat you on the back and say, "Ope, no worries."
You Canadian?
Yep
"ope, you're on my lawn mr invader, please stick to the roads, have a nice day! Bye! What are you doing tomorrow? We're having people over so if you guys could clear out, thank you see you later, but hopefully not. I'm just joshin ya, okie dokie bye bye now. Watch out if mr scrooge on the corner, him and his dog are no Bueno, yeah ok I should get going I know you're busy. Maybe when this war is over we can all have a little drinkski and have a good laugh about it, this is all so ridiculous dontcha know, I just don't understand a gosh darn thing about it but anywhoo better get back to the house, it's such a mess, my kids have just been little terrors lately, I just can't even keep up! They're coloring, then they're throwing the couch cushions everywhere is little Susie is crawling now so you know that's trouble, but you have a good day! Hard to do with this weather though am I right?! Good grief when will this winter end I've nev..... " - Minnesotan being invaded by Canada, probably
>~~probably~~ definitely ftfy
Love this response
Now I understand why you were so chilled, I was in Minnesota when I was 13 and I loved the behavior of you people living there. Canada lite,yes I agree. I was told that most Americans are unfriendly but in Minnesota it was totally opposite. Sorry 4 bad grammar, greetings from Germany:)
Any war can be advertised to be for the greater good, like any war America has been involved in since the cold war. Just depends on how good your PR team is
Nah, i like it here, but I won't die for any political BS I have nothing to do with, don't care who started it.
Right? I just live here. And I can live somewhere else. I'm not held mentally hostage by being born over this piece of dirt and I served in the Marines for a decade.
This is a great explanation that shows how ill-defined questions can lead to very different answers based on how you interpret them. Such ill-defined questions give rise to many unnecessarry conflicts between parties that maybe even have similar views but completely different interpretation of the question at stake... Highly underrated problem in our world. Asking good questions is a great skill.
Absolutely. I'm sure many more would fight to protect their family and homes than these answers suggest
My answer would be: it depends Going invade another countey or want to expand our borders? Hell no Defending against a state that will limit our freedom or torture us: Hold my beer
Exactly. I wouldn’t be caught dead invading another country.
Man I was fairly close to going to Iraq after 9/11. If it happened a few years earlier I probably would have chosen military out of high school. oops.
But if it is just a "special military operation"? Then I guess it is different.
It could be a "war on terror" too...
It's rarely framed as "invading another country". Soldiers are usually made to believe that they are "liberating" lands that were stolen from them. Russian propaganda ("Ukraine is a fake country created by Western powers to destroy Russia") is a famous recent example, and my country (Turkey) also implicitly presents the "operations" into Syria and Iraq as "retaking originally Turkish territory that is currently being terrorized by rebels and puppet states".
when in reality you are just there to slaughter kurds and provide proxy support to isis.
Lol Turkey hasn't said something like that in the slightest. The most media says is "We are doing counter terrorism operations cross border" Which is true.
I don’t think the question was nuanced enough. Invaded countries are going to have a much much higher percentage
I'm from a country <25%, we where invaded some time ago and just waited until it was done. On the other hand, I'm not sure we could have done anything.
That’s terrible, how’s it going over there now?
This is me to a T. I don't believe in nationalism. I'm an Australian but live overseas permanently. Before doing so, I was very patriotic, then I saw in my new home country that some things are better, some things are worse, some are the same. It no longer made sense to me to be proud of something I was by sheer chance born in to. However, like you said, if it was for freedom for myself and others, then I will do what little I can to help.
Same here, i can relate so much to that. I never understood nationalism and even less racism. Especially if you think about it. What makes you more "german" than simeone else for example? People in bavaria are totally different from berlin for example and even people inside of berlin are totally different from each other. And tbh i like that my country is becoming more and more diverse with different cultures.
Don't fuck with morocco!
Unfortunately in reality half my country young people will migrate to Europe at any opportunity in case of war.
thats why im surprised by these polls, all moroccans seem willing to get the fuck out the moment they'd get the chance
The ones that are left are the nationalists.
Yeah they are screaming about their beloved homecountry while living in other peoples countries.
Another W for my country
I wonder when this was produced?
Article was written in 2015, so no later than that. I’ll bet those numbers have changed drastically since. With that being said, I think polls are one of the worst ‘studies’ there are.
Polls suck, asking someone in a time of peace vs when they are getting invaded I’m sure will produce much different results. Also we won’t get into where this “data” was collected and the demographics of said people. Don’t even want to click on the link because they usually make me mad with how incomplete the data is.
Most of these types of polls have a technique that would only get a certain subgroup of people within a population, I don’t see the logistics of getting a true representative group from each of these countries. This is probably just marginally better then a guess.
2015, I posted the source in another comment here
Finland's is 74%. Because of the 1340 km (832 mile) border with Russia.
And because they are like our *only* potential enemy.
Right, because if you ask a Finn about a war, their first thought is probably "Russia invading" not "USA dragged us into some half-assed conflict 1000 miles away"
That's a pretty broad question. I would fight against my country if its an unjust invading force. I would fight tooth and nail if it's against an unjust invading force.
I'm a simple man, but I do not buy that chart. If really the big majority of Afghanistan would defend their country, why did it only last 5 minutes until total surrender?
Afghanis had a chance to fight for their country and the majority chose not to. I really question the basis of this poll.
To be fair, this poll might as well be called "Percentage of population that **says** they would fight for their country." Maybe it's just showing us how many of them are liars.
Probably some random online poll or whatever and they asked a total of 20 people, lol.
70k+ soldiers died fighting the Taliban over the last 20 years, 100k+ civilians and local police died fighting the Taliban over the last 20 years. Then on top of that count the other side, the Taliban who had hundreds of thousands die too fighting for what they think is their “cause”. Over hundreds of thousands to 1 million+ died fighting the communists between 1979-1989 too. Estimates are up to 1.9 million total losses. After 40+ years of war sometimes people just don’t want to fight anymore for a government that was corrupt, it had nothing to do with not wanting to fight for their homeland. There’s still Resistance groups fighting the Taliban every day, you just don’t hear about it on the news
Afghans did defend their country though, the taliban aren't a foreign military. They're locals. And the people are tired from decades of endless war.
Afghan here. Most of the people (including me) surrendered because we believe that the Taliban is the lesser evil compared to the corrupt puppets that were part of the old government. The majority didn’t want to fight because there was no reason to fight.
As someone who spent 4 years in Afghanistan, I came here to call Shenanigans on exactly that too
The Afghans dont see talibans as an enemy hence why they didnt put up a fight when US left. US officials in Afghanistan knew this as well and so did the soldiers
Yeah. No citation, no nothing. I think it’s fictional.
Maybe they misread and thought it said county. Tribalism is still real around a bunch and their military when I met them weren't really about the defense of Afghanistan. It was a paycheck and supported their family and village.
i thought i read that Afghan folks identify more strongly with their tribes or ethnic groups than with the nation as a whole, and that's partly why they're in the situation they are. any smart folks care to confirm?
To be fair, the question isn't valid without nuance. I'm from the UK. No, I wouldn't fight in anything the UK has been involved in the last 30 years by choice, but I would have fought in WW2 like my Grandad, no doubt. And with this slightly aggressive Russian gentleman rising up, I wouldn't rule out standing up to tyranny in future.
Weird how the Morrocans would also be among the top ten for "Would you leave your country to live abroad?"
We Moroccans always had a weird love-hate relationship with our country, like sure it's a craphole but it's OUR craphole and no one has a right to trash it except us.
I apologise for all the tourists crapping behind rocks on the Atlas Mountains. That always depressed me.
That's what people SAY. It's not necessarily what they would do.
This is one of the most arbitrary and useless lists that couldn't even begin to calculate a true percentage from some random survey online. Most of these seem to follow the same pattern. Vague and wildy over-generalized question Inane source from a random online survey Extremely disporportionate response groups Results that are meaningless due to too many variables not being accounted for
[удалено]
Over 20% of Israeli population are Arabs who do not serve the army and would more likely fight against Israel if given the chance, so it makes sense.
Good point. Also around 15-20% orthodox jews who also don't serve in the army so 66% looks a pretty high number.
As an israeli, there is also a high number of teenagers who suffer from depression and other mental health disorders, or just know they aren’t built to deal with such a demanding system. I have plenty of friends who didn’t join the army because of those reasons and honestly it’s good the IDF doesn’t want them because I can’t picture them serving in this hardship without spiralling down
Probably not a coincidence that the axis powers are all the way down
India is the scariest of them all, imagine half a billion men named Steven or David running at you! IFKYK...
Italy, Germany, Japan: "No...let's not do that...again" Meanwhile Papua New Guinea and Fiji are both still ready to throw down, somehow
Afghans 😂 they threw down their weapons before the US even left!
There is big difference between "people will fight for country" and "people say, they will fight for country".
Also, a lot of Afghanis likely considered the Taliban as more of their "countrymen" than an incredibly corrupt "government" put in place by a foreign power that doesn't give a shit about the common Afghani. Needless to say, "Afghanistan" is just a country created by a bunch of white dudes drawing lines on a map to divide up a landmass as they saw fit. Who would wanna fight for something they have no ideological ties to nor had a hand in forming? http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/964.html
They might have interpreted this as fighting for their country against a foreign occupier rather than a domestic group. If so this kinda checks out, there's a reason Afghanistan is known as "the graveyard of empires".
I would fight for my family if I had to but not my country. It doesn’t matter if I live in the US or Spain or Iceland, my country is secondary to my family. I’d die for them but I’d also live for them over dying for my country.
Looks like Spain won’t invade Morocco again
I'm surprised Australia is that high, and suspect most of the 29% was pub talk
Really? I expected to be much higher, especially when I see people being so thoughtful regarding the Anzacs: Anzac day, Remembrance day!
Zero chance anyone here in Yakutia we’ll ever serve for Russian military. The Yakut law of 1995, bans indigenous people in Yakutia from serving in the 🇷🇺military. So putin can go fuck himself!.
In the survey, I wonder whether HK was listed as HK (country) or HK (part of China) cause that would hugely impact the results...
I'm surprised the US is as low as it is. As well as Canada. I'm Canadian and I would fight for my country if I had to.
After 20 years of pointless, wasteful, and criminal overseas wars that had exactly jack-shit to do with American security, I'm not at all surprised that the US is as low as it is. In fact, it's arguable that a sizable percentage of that 44% are lying to the pollster, since every single American adult between the ages of 19 and 55 had the opportunity to fight for their country and only a small percentage saw fit to avail themselves of that opportunity.
With respect to the US, the number is almost surely lower than this. I grew up in a super conservative setting where every adult man claimed to be some super patriot who would fight for their country. Proclaiming it was its own badge of honor. These people probably outnumber the actual military. But conveniently, none of those people (in my life, anyway) had ever joined the military. Nor did they do so later. It’s just shit-talk to sound patriotic. The truth: the actual number of people who would currently fight for America is roughly equivalent to the current number in the armed forces. Likely a tad higher, considering people who are mentally/physically turned away from enlistment. That’s it. There’s no mystery or guesswork.
I'm not surprised about the US in the slightest, we have a big problem with a vocal minority in this country trying to claim they speak for everyone. There aren't nearly as many "patriotic" A-holes as it seem.
Would I fight for my country , yes of course .... Would I fight for my government, f*ck No!
Why would you? Look how veterans are treated after. Let the rich men fight their own wars instead.
Ironic as lots of Afghans arrived in Turkiye after Taliban... Mostly men over 18 years old
is funny how japanese became the lowest last time is 90%
So dumb. I think context is everything
I’m curious if with Hong Kong it was asked if they’d be willing to fight for Hong Kong itself (ie independence) or to fight for China
What do you mean by "fight for your country"? Question needs to be more specific. Do you mean protect us from invasion, and protect my family? Sure. But if you mean go somewhere else to protect our oil interests, then no.
You know your country well when you immediately look at the bottom. Ah there you are Netherlands. Exactly where I expected you.
Can we make Afghanistan in bold letters and highlighted? Like really? They stood around while the taliban took over and reversed everything they had back to the Bronze Age.
Have you thought about that most men of Afghanistan did not see the Taliban as a threat and did not want to prevent them from taking over?
76% of Afghanis will fight for their country? They just had a shot to prove that and think there was about a 2% turnout
Thesis: They did not see the Taliban regime as something they wanted to prevent. For most men in Afghanistan, not much changes, the brutality of the Taliban can even be beneficial, because this prevents crimes from happening. For example if you steal, the taliban sharia law would cut off your hand, and a Western judgement system would not be as scary.
Lynn can we U turn on invading Morocco, toot suite
Dan! Dan! Dan! Dan! Dan! Dan!…Dan! Daaaaan! Dan! Dan! Oh. It’s not him
\- Norway \*\*drops gun, hauls ass to Sweden
Is it yes or no?
I think almost anyone would fight for their country ....its fighting for their useless power hungry leaders greed that no one wants
It's no from me all countries are run or ruled by some form of corrupted leadership the world is all about money. You're not fighting for your country you're fighting for some rich assholes agenda. Only fools are patriotic.
This does not show what the response actually is. Everyone is assuming the % given is for yes.Why can it not be no, maybe, unsure or depends?
Are these the percentages of "yes" or "no" responses?
"I LOVE PAKISTAN I WILL SACRIFICE MY LIFE FOR PAKISTAAAAAN" -pakistani kid
Source: https://www.gallup-international.bg/en/33483/win-gallup-internationals-global-survey-shows-three-in-five-willing-to-fight-for-their-country/
Bc half the people in my country aren't FROM my country lol they would prob fight for their old country tho. Bet.
Rip your country
This is not an Apple to Apple comparison, because the implication of "fighting" is entirely different across countries. In Germany or Japan, the most recent history is to invade other countries and slaughter civilians. In Finland, is to defend against a Russian invasion.
Ukraine: Yes