47 NAT

Does anyone think that this would be a good idea?

I was just thinking how easy kids have it today and the minority who have a lack of respect for anything and everything and have never heard of choose to ignore the word discipline & respect......

This should also include the immigrants, dole loungers, etc been signed up as well IMO!

Anyone else agree?

Nath

Wurzel

iTrader: (1)

I think it is an excellent idea but the SN PC Lynch mob disagree.

We have has many discussions over this and the PC brigade think it is an infringement of Human Rights.

I was in the army for nearly 5 years and had a great time and got to travel.

Britain is one of the few countries in Europe that doesn't have any form of National Service and I am not including just the Army.

Here in Germany if you are unfit for the Military you work in Hospitals, Care centres etc but you still do your 2 years national service.

and I hate to say it but German kids are actually nice polite people and I have no problems leaving my car parked next to a gang of teanagers.

Scooby96

I agree with 47NAT

SiPie

Agree 100%

ozzy

Yes, agree 100%.

It won't work in all circumstances, but I think it would do the majority the world of good. Still trying to convince my younger brother to join the Marine Reservists with me

Stefan

imlach

I certainly think it can't do any harm.
Would surely benefit UK business in having more worldy, team-focussed staff.

I'm sure there are some downsides, but IMHO, would force young people into growing up and seeing what the world is really all about.

While we're here, National Service was a male-only pastime in the 40's & 50's. How do we deal with that now? Should it be compulsory for both sexes? How do you deal with young mothers??

ozzy

It takes two to make young mother's. I think women need as much discipline and self-pride as men do, but I'm not convinced the Army is the best place to deal with it.

In fact, I'd rather have national service done my the Marines than the Army as I'v experienced both and I know the one I prefer.

Sex education needs to start at a young age and should be dealt with outside of National Service.

Stefan

Tiggs

im sure the army loves the idea

Dracoro

Let's have a poll

Sir Humphrey: "You know what happens: nice young lady comes up to you. Obviously you want to create a good impression, you don't want to look a fool, do you? So she starts asking you some questions: Mr. Woolley, are you worried about the number of young people without jobs?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Are you worried about the rise in crime among teenagers?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think there is a lack of discipline in our Comprehensive schools?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think young people welcome some authority and leadership in their lives?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think they respond to a challenge?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Would you be in favour of reintroducing National Service?"
Bernard Woolley: "Oh...well, I suppose I might be."
Sir Humphrey: "Yes or no?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Of course you would, Bernard. After all you told you can't say no to that. So they don't mention the first five questions and they publish the last one."
Bernard Woolley: "Is that really what they do?"
Sir Humphrey: "Well, not the reputable ones no, but there aren't many of those. So alternatively the young lady can get the opposite result."
Bernard Woolley: "How?"
Sir Humphrey: "Mr. Woolley, are you worried about the danger of war?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Are you worried about the growth of armaments?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think there is a danger in giving young people guns and teaching them how to kill?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think it is wrong to force people to take up arms against their will?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Would you oppose the reintroduction of National Service?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "There you are, you see Bernard. The perfect balanced sample."

brickboy

Great idea, there was no crime or social problems at all in the 40s and 50s when national service was under way

If it was re-introduced, can't wait to see the first thread along these lines:

"F**K!!! Got my call-up papers!!! What do I do about my Scoob / how do I get out of it?"

Come on, apart from Wurzel and Ozzy, who have been in the forces, how many people will think its a great idea ... until THEY have to do it?

Sith

Would not want to do it. So glad I had no risk of it. I would likely put a gun to my head before going into the army.

Jamo

iTrader: (23)

presume you have been in the army then nat?

Jerome

I would like to see something along the lines of what goes on in Germany - ie a non-military alternative.

Having done recruit training in the TA, some people should never be in a military organisation, much less be let loose with a gun.

OllyK

And part of the basic training is to pass an APWT, the initial part of which ensures you are safe to handle the weapon, i.e. checking a rifle is clear / safe when you are passed it, load, unload, make safe drills etc. Guy got sacked off my basic training as he couldn't get that right. He never got near a blank round never mind a live one.

47 NAT

j4mou, no I haven't.

fatherpierre

No.

It won't work, and who would pay for it?

The armed forces are currently downsizing and only want people they choose as it's a professional organization and not a correction centre anymore.

People in the armed forces are there because they have been picked as good enough to be there and are then trained in their field. What good would a load kids who don't want to be there with mixed abilities be good for?

Plus, you'd simply create more criminals from this plan, in so much that being AWOL is a crime punishable by prison. Look at the AWOL rates in the armed forces and you'll see that they are very high in the Army. And these AWOL pepole CHOSE to join the forces. Imagine the AWOL rates if Nat service was introduced?!?!?!

Every enlistment day would create 1000s more criminals who would then have to find 'other' means to support themselves as getting a (legal) job wouldn't be possible.

So we'd have:

More expensive and less professional armed forces
More people in prison
A higher crime rate

Yeah, good idea.........

BMWhere?

I'm all for National Service provided it doesn't mean a decrease in the number of career soldiers. Having a reduced core army/navy/airforce and relying on national service to make up the numbers would significantly reduce the effectiveness of the British military.

I like the system in Germany where if you have a legitimate objection against National Service you have to do community service instead. Mostly this is changing sheets and giving bed baths in the hospitals, but can also be things like helping out at schools or working for the local council collecting litter/tidying public gardens, cleaning grafitti etc.

The result is a clean and tidy environment, no staff shortages in hospitals/schools and a Nation that generally has respect for other peoples property and respect for the environment. The biggest problems in Germany are from the younger kids that have not yet done their national service - They're the ones that are dropping the litter and writing the Grafitti, but they still generally have respect for personal property!

OllyK

Bit like introducing speed cameras, putting up car tax or car insurance then?
Would be happy to, please point me to your source, what do you consider to be high by the way??

fatherpierre

Speed cameras don't send people to prison unless in extreme circumstances. AWOL does, every time and has no relation to making someone change their way of life. A very poor, weak comparison - one of the most laughable I've seen on SN so far!

I'll get the fugures.....

From 4 years ago but still valid:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/uk/776462.stm

http://www.refusingtokill.net/UKGulf...heBigIssue.htm

Plus, I'm assuming that those who agree with Nat Serv have passed the age at which they would be called up if it were introduced??

Why should the generation it would affect be forced to do something you didn't just because you see them as 'lay-abouts'? That would have been the way the older generation saw us at that age.

Except me, of course. I was in the military at that stage because I chose to be........

OllyK

You said it would create more crimimals, speed cameras etc do the same. If you want to argue the toss over the sentence delivered for the crime, then that's a different issue.

I look forward to the "fugures".

fatherpierre

You were comparing speed cameras to criminality. AWOL means prison - fact. AWOL would be the outcome in for very many of the people forced to join the military

A very poor, weak link. Tenuous in the extreme.

You may as well compare dog owners who don't have their dogs correctly labelled up to people facing prison through going AWOL, as they are commiting a crime under UK law.

OllyK

1 in 55 = 1.8%
1 in 48 = 2.0%

So a 0.2% rise is massive??? A 2% staff turnover is actually pretty damn good by most industry standards. Not done any serious digging, but 50% is not uncommon in sales and in some cases 75% in MIS.

So you point is what exactly??

RichWalk

(flippancy mode on) Give Teachers guns and a licence to kill- the problem wouldnt get as far as National Service being required!

fatherpierre

Good job you don't play darts. You've missed the board.

That's not staff turnover. Staff turnover is when you leave at the end of your stated contract, or hand in your notice - as I did.

The figures are for people who signed up voluntarily and then did a bunk.

And 2% of the whole armed forces is a lot of people. I'm not sure on current figuers bit it was around 220 000 a couple of years back.

That'll be my point.

wrxtankie

Personally i think it would be a pants idea,
Firstly, it would no longer be an army of proffesionals who want to do the job and be more like any other army. Unlike the one it is well known as being probably the most proffesional and the best. I am a little biased.

Second, todays youth couldnt deal with the day to day life of the forces.( Im talking about the majority mot every single one )

as for the ones who volunteer now a large number are just not up to it. It has become so bad that they have had to lower standards for recruitment and retension. To top off that they are heavily recruiting from Fiji, St lucia, Jamaica, and most of the other commonwealth countries.

There are a couple of reasons for this, one being as stated above a lack of volunteers from our own country with the required skill and moral courage to see it through.

And probably the biggest reason which is to promote ethnic diversity within the armed forces today. as only two years ago the percentage represented by other ethnic origins was only 1.8%.

(Im not sure exactly what the national percentage is. It would be interesting to know just to compare)

Well thats my 2 pence worth

wrxtankie

Just short of 90.000 in the army today............ and shrinking.

Buckrogers

Thats a really good idea!

Might get some sense of responsiblity drilled into them!

Should be completely in addition to the current numbers in the Army.

Jerome

Lots of people seem to be assuming military National Service is just the Army. My father did National Service in the RAF.

I'm sure the AWOL rates in the RN and RAF are much lower than the Army. When I went on Joint Services courses, all the soldiers are amazed at the high standards of accomodation/food etc, whilst the airmen and sailors are griping about how poor it is compared to what they're used to. The "**** about" factor in the Army is significantly higher (and probably needs to be, to an extent) than the other services.

On reflection, maybe a military National Service would not work nowadys. The Army has enough trouble finding volunteer recruits who can hack soldiering as it is, without some Playstation addicted couch potato being forced to do service. Dilution of any of the services would be a bad idea also. It would be armed forces on the cheap - and you get what you pay for.

I would still back a non-military National Service though.

Failing that, any ****** caught committing an anti-social crime has to do some reparation service as part of their sentence. Graffiti "artists" made to clean up graffiti, litter louts made to do litter picking etc.

fatherpierre

I was referring to the Armed Forces as a whole. Not just the Army.

fatherpierre

That's just community service, though.

They have enough trouble getting the genuine criminals who are lucky enough to just get CS to turn up!!

Imagine telling your average chav that he has to report to X base for 2 years of hard training when he's only ever done the odd 100m sprint from the local dealer or the police.