The argument _for_ the exemption is that it will allow them to join the workforce and contribute to the economy, instead of staying in the yeshiva (which is currently a condition necessary to get the _current_ exemption, and which I think also furthers cements into the orthodox lifestyle). I wonder whether this argument can be tested before the exemption is actually given.
So secular folks risk their lives in military service to secure the lives of these Haredis, and upon returning to civilian life find out that no jobs exist for them, because the (quite hated) Haredis have taken them up? Sounds like a very sound recipe for stability indeed.
In some countries with universal conscription that can be dodged, men who actually serve are more likely to be hired for desirable jobs. So, it could be that even if Haredim work in secular professions, those veterans would still have an advantage over them in the employment market and the Haredim wouldn't be viewed as ungrateful competition.
That's not the case everywhere. When I was young in the Netherlands it was pretty much frowned upon because conscripts would have nothing to do but smoke weed and clean some tanks for the 50th time. It was widely regarded as a waste of a year and a half. I'm very glad I was disqualified and it never was a barrier for me in life.
I guess in countries where shots are actually fired in anger this experience may vary wildly.
At the very least an 18 year old who has been forced to fend for themselves is very different to an 18 year-old who still lives at home and has their mum do their washing.
Fend for themselves? The military is the one place where one doesn't get to do that. Especially conscripts.
Following orders that are barked at them by usually less intelligent people that just happen to have some stripes on their shoulder is not fending for oneself. You get fed, sleep and eat on command, what fending is there to do?
I would say you're conflating freedom with fending for one's self.
A teenager living at home has a high degree of freedom, but they don't have to fend for themselves, that is, they don't have to take responsibility for doing all the things that need doing in life, they will find their dirty shirt left on the floor, magically cleaned, ironed and put back in the wardrobe.
Someone in the army has a low amount of freedom, but they have to take responsibility for all the things that need doing in life. If they don't make sure their shirt is washed, ironed, etc they will be held responsible.
But the military have a laundry service, cooking service etc. Everything is still done for them. Except the things they are ordered to do. Throwing your shirts in the laundry is not really different from home.
Moving into your own place for the first time is much more like fending for yourself. Having to learn to cook, wash, manage your finances. Living independently and having to live with your mistakes, not just being told off for them by a superior. And really, things that actually matter, not something stupid like not having a starched shirt in the morning. The real world no longer cares about such superficial matters.
The only thing the military is really good at teaching is obedience but at the expense of suppressing critical thought and creativity. If I were an employer I'd like my employees to tell me if they disagree and not blindly follow orders.
PS: Yes my aversion to the military is pretty clear sorry.
Last I checked, the aforementioned services you state (cleaning, laundry, cooking, etc) were all handled by conscripts themselves, and not by some sweet outsourced civilian agency (of course, things could be different for US folks in a warzone). In fact, some high level officers are often assigned a bunch of conscripts to do all their boring work for them. This is mostly the case in countries with a conscripted military, or a large enough population.
things in Israel and Israeli army somewhat different from what you describe. If you curious, go to /r/Israel, there were a discussion last week about difference between US and Israeli armies
