Beezerk
Money List Winner
A complete jerk then.
Conscription
- Thread starter Doon frae Troon
- Start date
A complete jerk then.
On a slight tangent, rather than out and out conscription, would it not be more viable to have some sort of national service and actually give some of the 16-18 year olds in this country a chance to learn a trade, improve educational skills out of a classroom (school/college) environment, and generally equip them to be more able to survive and find employment rather than drifting straight from school into a spiral of benefits.
Granted, many leave school with qualifications and go onto further education or employment and so perhaps this does need to be a phased thing so that it doesn't jepordise their decision or ability to study or work. I'm not necessarilt advocating equipping them for military service and it has to be more than these government school leaver/apprenticeship schemes we've seen over the years that to my jaded eyes at least are short lived and achive little.
No doubt I'm looking for some utopia that's unachievable but surely there has to be some middle ground somewhere on this. Had there been national service in the 1980's as I was leaving school, I may not have wanted it but I feel I'd have got something out of it.
Granted, many leave school with qualifications and go onto further education or employment and so perhaps this does need to be a phased thing so that it doesn't jepordise their decision or ability to study or work. I'm not necessarilt advocating equipping them for military service and it has to be more than these government school leaver/apprenticeship schemes we've seen over the years that to my jaded eyes at least are short lived and achive little.
No doubt I'm looking for some utopia that's unachievable but surely there has to be some middle ground somewhere on this. Had there been national service in the 1980's as I was leaving school, I may not have wanted it but I feel I'd have got something out of it.
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
People that leave school at 16 with no qualifications have their own choice to join the forces if they wish - and then they can go on and have a full military career learning a trade as long as they have the right attitude and aptitude for it
The military have enough on their hands training the people that actually want to be there and have a career in their mind
Let the military do their job and let the government find other ways to sort out lay about who can't be bothered to do anything to earn money and will prefer benefits.
The military have enough on their hands training the people that actually want to be there and have a career in their mind
Let the military do their job and let the government find other ways to sort out lay about who can't be bothered to do anything to earn money and will prefer benefits.
Foxholer
Blackballed
Longcross 'Tank Factory' is now used as (Longcross) Film Studios - lots of Skyfall and Harry Potter stunts were planned/filmed there. Easy access to Wentworth Edinburgh's 8th on one side and 'best' road for mad motorcyclists pulling wheelies - well made as they sneak onto the M3 from a couple of gates if required. They actually had a course of their own at Barrowhill!
williamalex1
Money List Winner
Much the same as in my post 24.
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
What the government could do is employ the military people they have made redundant in the past 5 years to form a "Benefits School" where young people get taught life skills etc by ex military - a bit like that bad lads army that used to be around
Adi2Dassler
Journeyman Pro
I'm actually pretty keen on national service.Slightly tweaked from the old version I managed to avoid, but will aspects of military training, public service, teaching life skills and basics such as minor sparking/plumbing/engineering.Possibly as an alternative to university ( too many kids go to uni now imo).A degree of regimented life for todays youth ins't the worst idea.
Here's a question that maybe crosses from this thread to the referendum thread, and interesting given there seems to be loads ( and loads) of serving/ex forces on here:
Would you prefer The UK to become nuclear free if the capital investment was moved to 'normal' military budgets?Increased spending on equipment, increased numbers of troops instead on nukes?
Here's a question that maybe crosses from this thread to the referendum thread, and interesting given there seems to be loads ( and loads) of serving/ex forces on here:
Would you prefer The UK to become nuclear free if the capital investment was moved to 'normal' military budgets?Increased spending on equipment, increased numbers of troops instead on nukes?
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
There is no reasons why the country can't have a nuclear deterrent and more troops and equipment
Don't believe it should be a choice between one or the other - both are vital to our defence of this country and the countries that are part of NATO
Don't believe it should be a choice between one or the other - both are vital to our defence of this country and the countries that are part of NATO
Ethan
Money List Winner
This bad idea is generally proposed by people who have passed the age of eligibility for same, although they sometimes throw in "it might have done me some good".
It isn't 40s or 50s Britain now, the world has changed and national service is a relic of the past. Changing the economy so there is full employment would be a better strategy, but the people who pay the Government don't want that because part of it would be to get them to pay their taxes.
Foxholer
Blackballed
Apart from the huge cost!
Are they? I'm certain that there would be no change to UK's ability to defend itself, or any other Nato ally, if it scrapped the 'Nuclear deterrent'! They are, after all, not UK's warheads anyway!
They are certainly not Defensive weapons!
Val
Ryder Cup Winner
Join the Royal Engineers, TA version and you can get that currently
Nukes form an important part of the defence, they have to form part of the plan. It is inconceivable in my eyes NOT to have nukes.
Val
Ryder Cup Winner
As a weapon you are correct but as a deterrent it's a perfect defense. It basically says "try your luck and see what you get".
It's our countries version of a guard dog
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
There are lots of areas that are a hugh cost that could be reduced to allow our forces to be better equipped
And yes Nuclear weapons are vital to our defence in a world where other countries still hold a nuclear threat - the day that threat disappears is the day we no longer need nuclear arms
Adi2Dassler
Journeyman Pro
The reason I ask, is my attention was drawn to an article from last year in the NY Times.All of this prior to the problems we face in East Ukraine.Having nukes doesn't seem to be bothering Putin as he wanders thru there, and Belarus must be ******** themselves.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/23/w...ding-under-scrutiny.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/23/w...ding-under-scrutiny.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
The UK forces have more than pulled their own weight in any NATO led missions
The US will have to deal with their own trigger happy consequences - the US as with anything will always go on the offensive using quantity - that costs them a lot of money.
The UK prefer to deal with things using the quality that we have as an armed forces - superior training has meant a far more effective force even if it's a lot smaller.
The UK have recently committed £5bn to new Scout vehicles plus billions to new Hercules replacements , Warships , JSF and more typhoons.
The US will have to deal with their own trigger happy consequences - the US as with anything will always go on the offensive using quantity - that costs them a lot of money.
The UK prefer to deal with things using the quality that we have as an armed forces - superior training has meant a far more effective force even if it's a lot smaller.
The UK have recently committed £5bn to new Scout vehicles plus billions to new Hercules replacements , Warships , JSF and more typhoons.
I fully understand we're not in those sepia coloured days of yore. Full employment would be a much better option but surely something more formulated that all these government training schemes which seem to be continually rolled up in new guises. I'm not actually keen on the full military discipline side of things and feel at this time, it's best left to the army and reservists and assume should the nation ever been drawn into a global war again conscription would come in anyway if the need arose.
I do think if there is a way of getting those from 16-22 into some kind of formulated regime (if only for a three-six month period) we may be better off longer term. That said, national (military) service exists in many nations across Europe and beyond, so maybe there is still a degree of merit in there somewhere and we're just not doing it right
Old Skier
Tour Winner
Fair Q and one that needs an honestly thought out response . My view, and one debated with the last armed forces minister is " What is the point of a nuclear weapon if your not prepared to use it, and as it's nuclear, you would have to be prepared to be the first to use it". His response was that the UK would not be the first to strike. Things may have changed now, who knows.
Being no 2 in a nuclear strike means it's to late.
Old Skier
Tour Winner
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
Shame it missed one country that harbours and trains a great deal amount of terrorists
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
The World has indeed changed and not for the better. The hand wringing Liberal experiment that promotes something for nothing, the breakdown of Family virtues, multiculturalism and a legal system that favours criminals has failed spectacularly. We now need to step back and look again on what really matters and how we can give people purpose and a pride in themselves and their country.
National Service of a form will do this, anyone who has carried out basic training in the Military will know what its like to parade as a tight knit group in front of their loved ones with their chests pumped with pride. Unfortunately this is something many young people will never experience, instead they will grow up with resentment and a feeling of worthlessness.
These suggestions that it's not possible to bring back National Service or train people so that they can be quickly made ready for service is just an example of the wishy washy claptrap we are feed these days. It's not whether we can afford it, it's whether we can afford not to.
In my opinion of course.
