wrighbrothers
Posts: 1807
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 8:15 am

Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 04, 2007 7:46 pm

Hello.

This is mainly aimed at UK members, but everyone can chirp in with their opinion if they wish.
Anyway, the question I wish to put to you is:
'Do you believe national service should be re-introduced in the United Kingdom', and (perhaps more importantly) would those of you who would have to do it (so that would be anyone younger than or actually 18yrs old I'd guess) want to/ be willing do it ? Or even, for it to be used as a form of punishment for criminals (such as in the TV show, 'Bad Lads Army') ?

Me ?....hmmm, I'd have to go with a yes for all of them, however, perhaps have a different kind of national service for criminals, perhaps a tougher one as punishment ?
Reason ? Well, I'm currently in a military organisation, and it's done me no harm. It's taught me self-worth, belief and let me do things people in civilian life would never be able to do. I noticed a change in my attitude towards things and in-fact, I never regret joining. I just think that most people would benefit from a bit of military structure.

Over to you.......
Wrighbrothers
Always stand up for what is right, even if it means standing alone..
 
disruptivehair
Posts: 565
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 9:28 pm

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 04, 2007 7:48 pm

Yes....re-introduce it for at least a year both in the UK and the US.
 
BMIFlyer
Posts: 8065
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:11 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 04, 2007 7:49 pm

Yes please.

somewhere nice for the chavs to learn some respect after leaving school.

I'd say 3 years service just to be safe.




Lee
Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 04, 2007 7:57 pm

Quoting BMIFlyer (Reply 2):
somewhere nice for the chavs to learn some respect after leaving school.

Nah, all you would have as a result are chavs that think they are tough. Cant beat the chaviness out of a chav.
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 9987
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 04, 2007 7:58 pm

Yes, I would have no issue with National Service. I would though wonder how it could work with the current government's policy of getting as many people into University as possible.


Dan Smile
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
BMIFlyer
Posts: 8065
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:11 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 04, 2007 8:07 pm

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 3):
Nah, all you would have as a result are chavs that think they are tough.

Chavs think they are tough anyways  banghead 



Lee
Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
 
disruptivehair
Posts: 565
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 9:28 pm

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 04, 2007 8:07 pm

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 4):
Yes, I would have no issue with National Service. I would though wonder how it could work with the current government's policy of getting as many people into University as possible.


Dan

With so many students taking gap years would anyone really notice?
 
TPAnx
Posts: 1007
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 4:53 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 04, 2007 9:46 pm

Military, or Peace Corps, or Americorps --some form of national service should be required for everyone...makes you appreciate what you've got.
TPAnx
I read the news today..oh boy
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12362
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 04, 2007 9:54 pm

Perhaps an alternative to military service would be to serve in community or international programs as a condition to enter public (government run) Colleges and Universities, with tuition breaks for such service.
There are huge needs in many communities for cheap help to do many needed tasks such as in our schools, parks, other recreational programs, seniors, and so on. International service options in the USA could include something like the Peace Crops - that would be far more positively effective for the the USA and it's relations to the outside world vs. military in Iraq, etc.
 
767Lover
Posts: 3254
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2003 6:32 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 04, 2007 9:57 pm

Quoting Wrighbrothers (Thread starter):
Or even, for it to be used as a form of punishment for criminals

Having criminals in the service can be a dangerous thing. You don't want someone with a criminal mind handling a gun or being in a position to watch the back of someone else.
 
Sabena332
Posts: 14938
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 3:57 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 04, 2007 11:02 pm

When I was 19 years old I had to serve 13 month of civil service. It sucked at the beginning when I worked in the accountants' department of a hospital, I had a dispute with my boss on a daily base. Then I got transfered to the emergency room for disciplinary reasons and that was actually a good thing, I really liked to work there after a few days, the doctors were quite funny guys and the nurses were friggin' hot! Big grin

Some highlights I experienced:

- I saw many interesting things such as emergency surgeries
- I got a heli ride in an Eurocopter
- I met many, many interesting people, e.g. almost all players and the coach of the VfL Bochum football team
- I got tickets for the stadium every second week (grandstand of course)
- I learnt how to deal with people in extreme situations
- I learnt a lot of things regarding health insurances and employers' liability insurance associations

Sure, there were also things which were not so nice, e.g. I saw people dying and suffering from pain, but all in all I can say that it was a good experience. Furthermore did I earn good money, more than my friends who made an apprenticeship during this time.

Patrick
NZ1's mother is a disgusting crack-whore and his father is a worthless alcoholic!
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12362
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Thu Apr 05, 2007 1:43 am

Quoting Sabena332 (Reply 10):
When I was 19 years old I had to serve 13 month of civil service

Don't forget too you got work and life experience, something that had to help you later in life and a good intention for such programs. Perhaps if some 19 year olds in the world had to do such community based work, they may find their life career, as well as help their community, and get the side benefits like you got.
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Thu Apr 05, 2007 1:44 am

No - as a victim of mandatory military conscription, I don't believe it is an effective way to staff defense forces. Possibly some form of civilian service at home or overseas as part of aid projects would be more effective.
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Thu Apr 05, 2007 1:57 am

Quoting BMIFlyer (Reply 2):
Yes please.

somewhere nice for the chavs to learn some respect after leaving school.

I'd say 3 years service just to be safe.

So you wouldn't r

Quoting BMIFlyer (Reply 2):
Yes please.

somewhere nice for the chavs to learn some respect after leaving school.

I'd say 3 years service just to be safe.

So you'd take kids fresh out of school and instead of them going on to university, you'd force them to waste three years of their life? Or maybe you'd only force those who don't go to university, creating a class-based system where those with the money avoid national service? Or maybe you'd force them to do national service after uni, from 21-24 keeping valuable and productive young talent out of the work force? Then you'd expect people to start contributing to their pensions at 24, not 21, on lower wage, this somehow not adding to the pensions crisis?

Talk is cheap; it's very easy to demand national service, but the practicalities are never thought of. Respect isn't taught through the military.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Sabena332
Posts: 14938
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 3:57 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Thu Apr 05, 2007 2:26 am

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 11):
Don't forget too you got work and life experience, something that had to help you later in life and a good intention for such programs.

It helped me indeed later. I applied as an office clerk apprentice at a big Finnish mobile phone manufacturer after my civil service, I got the job and some weeks later I was told that I got it because I already had one year work experience, the other applicants had it not because they came directly from school.

It was also a very diversified job so I learnt a lot of things. I worked on the computer, I had to do basic office work, I had to communicate with health insurances, I had to assist in the emergency room when there were not all nurses available, I had to call the pizza delivery service on night-shifts (  Wink ), etc. I learnt how to improvise in stressy situations, I learnt how to deal with people of all kinds, and I learnt to stay cool in difficult and confusing situations. In a nutshell: I learnt a lot of things which helped me later in both my work life and private life.

Oh yes, I also looked very stylo all the time. When I was on duty I had to wear such a green hospital dress like George Clooney in the Emergency Room TV series, this dress in combination with a beeper and a hospital ID made me look damned important  Silly (this outfit was always helpful when I asked a nurse for a date).  Wink

Patrick
NZ1's mother is a disgusting crack-whore and his father is a worthless alcoholic!
 
sandrozrh
Posts: 2420
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:19 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:17 am

Quoting Sabena332 (Reply 14):
a big Finnish mobile phone manufacturer

No prizes for guesses here Big grin
 
GDB
Posts: 12652
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:38 am

UK National Service ended at the start of the 1960's.
It ended since there was no longer a requirement for it-both due to a reduction in overseas commitments, and the UK nuclear deterrent becoming fully operational.

In the long history of the British Armed forces, conscription is an anomaly.
Only after huge losses in WW1, as the nation fully mobilised in WW2, at the end of WW2, the UK still had massive commitments overseas.
Millions were 'de-mobbed', but still, large numbers were needed.
To garrison the then occupied Germany, the Suez Canal Zone, the Far East.
National Servicemen fought (and died), in Palestine, Malaya, in the Korean War (one who fought there, was a Londoner called Private Micklewright, you know him as Micheal Caine), in Kenya, before and during the Suez debacle.

Conscription was very unpopular post war, both with the military and many of the conscripts themselves.
It led to skills shortages, it blunted UK post war economic recovery.
The Army tradition has always been professional.

Remember, at the height of 'Pax Britannia, when the UK was THE superpower, it was maintained by a small (by European standards), professional army. Only 30,000 troops in the India of the Raj for example.
Because the key to this was naval power, meaning after Napoleon, the British Isles faced no prospect of continental invasion, there was a marked reluctance to be entangled in the conflicts in mainland Europe, in fact this helped the UK maintain it's status.
Until 1914.

The Kaiser called the British Expeditionary Force of 1914, 'a contemptibly small army'-hence the (proud) term of 'Old ' Contemptibles' as they would call themselves.
At first it showed, such was the skills of this force, many German units thought they were facing opponents armed with many more machine guns than was the case.
But as it turned into an industrial war, a stalemate, the cream of the British Army was badly depleted.
At first, Lord Kitchner's call for volunteers exceeded all expectations, rather than a few hundred thousand, over a million men responded to his call.
As the meat grinder of a war carried on, conscription followed.
The sheer numbers needing training, and fast, led partly to the often bizarre tactics, like walking towards the enemy, since bayonet training was something that could be taught quickly.

My father was a National Serviceman in the 1950's, actually, he did not mind it, he learned a trade useful in civilian life, he was probably in the minority though.
The farthest he got was Germany, for huge exercises as West Germany joined NATO.
He had fond memories of being billeted in a barn in the harsh winter, sustained by food by a friendly farmer, and with schnapps!

But a darker side, one big exercise saw several dozen die in accidents. He himself had been working on a 40mm Bofors AA gun, when an officer and National Servicemen crew were killed by a breech explosion while live firing not long afterwards. Dad was blameless as it was, but he was also one of the first on the scene, six dead bodies confronting him.

Later, he and his comrades had drop tanks from a combat aircraft narrowly miss them.
He remembers an old Sten sub machine gun being dropped and going off on full auto, one dead.

National Service for many, seemed to have a lot of hanging around around in lonely barracks, menial, pointless jobs being assigned, such as whitewashing the coal'.
You could get out of being called up by claiming homosexuality, but in the 1950's, this was still a criminal offence that could land you in jail.

Some coped badly with being away from home, the strict disclipline, Dad saw no bullying but it happened, suicides were not uncommon.
One way was on the firing range, turning the rifle around, barrel in the mouth, pulling the trigger.

He learned to avoid volunteering for anything. For example, a NCO might ask if anyone could play the piano, if someone said 'yes', they could end up shifting a bloody great piano from one end of the Sgt.'s mess to the other.
'Anyone keen on photography?' Someone says 'yes'.
'Right then, report at 0700 tomorrow to the stores, take a mop and bucket, and clean out the camp cinema.
On the other hand, a friend of his DID volunteer for something once, and was posted to Hong Kong, from the cold, dank barracks at Catterick, to the wonders of the Orient!

Dad also personally preferred the old style, Aristo-style officers, in his experience they were gentlemen who treated you with respect, rather than a National Serviceman who had been selected as an officer, with 'a chip on his shoulder.

Unlike the US, which still has the legal framework to re-institute a Draft as they call it, and has the infrastructure and equipment to do this quite quickly, the UK forces do not (probably deliberately), have this infrastructure.

It is also worth noting that during conscription, the forces had little equipment modernisation, they fought with what had been used in WW2.
As it became clear, after 1957, that National Service was running down to end, within a few years, the army had a new rifle, new machine gun, new anti tank weapons, new armoured personnel carriers, a new tank.
UK forces today ARE, generally well equipped, whatever the press might say, conscription would soon change that.

National Service in the UK, at least in a military form, is like Capital Punishment, it is not coming back.

[Edited 2007-04-04 20:51:10]
 
GDB
Posts: 12652
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Sun Apr 08, 2007 12:50 am

Thinking some more about this, had National Service in the UK been retained, would it not have had an effect on our cultural life too?

In the 1960's, a wave of bands, spearheaded by the Beatles, followed by The Rolling Stones, The Kinks, The Who and many more, had a profound effect on not only the development of popular music, but culture in general.
As well as a very positive effect on the balance of payments!

Sure, in the 1950's, there were successful musicians, but the success was always local, usually fleeting.

With conscription still, would Lennon, McCartney, Harrison and Starr been together when they were, how they were?
Ditto for Jones, Jagger and Richards, Townshend, Daltry, Moon, Entwhistle, the Davies brothers.
Some would have been away in the forces. Some would not have met merely by trying to avoid service, either through higher education or doing a bunk.

Without them, doing what did, when they did, the development of this new culture would not have preceded as it did, and not only in the UK either.
The Clash might have sung in 1977 'No Elvis, Beatles or The Rolling Stones', quite, but without them.........

The US of course in the 1960's, saw the Draft return to feed the escalating commitment to Vietnam, but the British National Service was a much wider net, more all encompassing, there was no border with Canada either for potential British evaders.
 
wrighbrothers
Posts: 1807
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 8:15 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:27 am

Thanks for the replies, this topic is meant to be a bit of a 'think tank' and it's interesting to see the diverse opinions. However, one thing i've seen is lots of people focusing on the negative points of national service

Look at South Korea. Each able male has to do 2yrs (I believe, although it's being shortened) military service. Now, their crime levels are lower, there's more respect for elders (which I'm sure lots of the folks would like here) and don't seem to have such big social problems.
The military offer good qualities which employers look for, and a bit of military service on the CV doesn't do any harm. It shows the person has operated as a team before, learned new skills and has learned social skills such as discipline. The military does actually offer the chance to earn NVQ's, degrees, trades etc which would be useful to people in later life. Remember, it wasn't so long ago, that the most popular way of becoming a medical person (doctor, nurse etc) was to actually join up with the armed forces, do you minimum service and then come out the other end fully qualified. Not too many places which still offer that kind of free commitment to people's careers.

wrighbrothers
Always stand up for what is right, even if it means standing alone..
 
GDB
Posts: 12652
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:40 am

True there are advantages, but the (democratic) nations still with heavy conscription, have a pressing military need for it.
Like South Korea, like Israel.
Not the UK.
 
wrighbrothers
Posts: 1807
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 8:15 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:56 am

Quoting GDB (Reply 19):
True there are advantages, but the (democratic) nations still with heavy conscription, have a pressing military need for it.
Like South Korea, like Israel.
Not the UK.

That is true, however, would you not consider the droop in troops numbers over the years along with the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts a pressing military need/burden along with other commitments around the world ? There's still over 8,500 troops in Northern Ireland alone (although that's soon going to go down to about.....5000 I believe) I'm just interested to know...I'm not doubting your opinion.

Quoting GDB (Reply 16):
But a darker side, one big exercise saw several dozen die in accidents. He himself had been working on a 40mm Bofors AA gun, when an officer and National Servicemen crew were killed by a breech explosion while live firing not long afterwards. Dad was blameless as it was, but he was also one of the first on the scene, six dead bodies confronting him.

Later, he and his comrades had drop tanks from a combat aircraft narrowly miss them.
He remembers an old Sten sub machine gun being dropped and going off on full auto, one dead.

But deaths in the military weren't and aren't uncommon, not just because of war and conflicts, but during training. During full scale training ops in West German (as it was then) it was pretty normal to have at-least 1 or more soldier(s) die each year during the training, not usually suicide.

Suicide's again, always happen in the military, more people have died by suicide in our army than have in any major war, conflict etc we've been in since the turn of the century, if not before, and due to the nature of the job, training, stress etc it's not much of a surprise.

Wrighbrothers
Always stand up for what is right, even if it means standing alone..
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Tue Apr 10, 2007 5:49 pm

Quoting Wrighbrothers (Reply 20):
That is true, however, would you not consider the droop in troops numbers over the years along with the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts a pressing military need/burden along with other commitments around the world ?

That's to do with reductions in defence spending post-Cold War, not an issue of conscription. It is certainly true that the government needs to decide what it wants its military for, an interventionist force capable of going around the world at a moments notice, or a UK defence force. If they want the former, then they have to pay for it.

Quoting GDB (Reply 16):
Remember, at the height of 'Pax Britannia, when the UK was THE superpower, it was maintained by a small (by European standards), professional army.

And not a very good one, at that. The idea of a highly professional British army is comparatively recent. Much of British history is notable for an outstanding and utterly pre-eminent navy, and a small, and often fairly incompetent army.

But even the navy, which reached its absolute height in terms of relative manpower during the Napoleonic Wars, when for only time in history one navy possessed more than half the world's warships, was largely a volunteer service. Impressment certainly did happen, but it tends to be over-played in popular histories, partly because of confusion between impressed sailors and imprest sailors, who received a bounty for joining up. Equally, dragging landsmen out of the taverns certainly wasn't widespread, not least because they were of no use whatever to the navy. They needed professional seamen, not farmhands. For the same reason, the navy repeatedly and categorically refused to take convicts into the service.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:00 am

Some type of National Service oughta be required.

At least at that point, all the people pissin' and moanin' about the Military, Cops, Fireman, and the like will have a leg to stand on in their argument.

Further, if you live in the US/UK, in a great land generally free of the  redflag  found in too many places on this planet, you should be giving a little payback . . . .

And the end result may be that you're a better person because of your experience.

Military? Americorps? Peace Corps? Something of the sort. Everyone, male and female, gay, straight, lesbian - if you live in the US, you should spend at least two years repaying the country for your freedoms.
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:14 am

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 22):
At least at that point, all the people pissin' and moanin' about the Military, Cops, Fireman, and the like will have a leg to stand on in their argument.

Of course people who haven't been in the military can criticise it! What sort of nonsense are you talking about?

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 22):
Further, if you live in the US/UK, in a great land generally free of the redflag found in too many places on this planet, you should be giving a little payback . . . .

Trust me, I'm giving a lot of payback; and I'm giving this much because I didn't waste two years of my youth doing military service, I went to university and got a good job.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 22):

And the end result may be that you're a better person because of your experience.

Aside from the fact that:

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 13):
So you'd take kids fresh out of school and instead of them going on to university, you'd force them to waste three years of their life? Or maybe you'd only force those who don't go to university, creating a class-based system where those with the money avoid national service? Or maybe you'd force them to do national service after uni, from 21-24 keeping valuable and productive young talent out of the work force? Then you'd expect people to start contributing to their pensions at 24, not 21, on lower wage, this somehow not adding to the pensions crisis?

Talk is cheap; it's very easy to demand national service, but the practicalities are never thought of. Respect isn't taught through the military.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:45 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 23):
Of course people who haven't been in the military can criticise it! What sort of nonsense are you talking about?

Of course they can, and they can also let their ignorance show through - in a lot of cases, quite brightly.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 23):
Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 22):

And the end result may be that you're a better person because of your experience.

Aside from the fact that:

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 13):
So you'd take kids fresh out of school and instead of them going on to university, you'd force them to waste three years of their life? Or maybe you'd only force those who don't go to university, creating a class-based system where those with the money avoid national service? Or maybe you'd force them to do national service after uni, from 21-24 keeping valuable and productive young talent out of the work force? Then you'd expect people to start contributing to their pensions at 24, not 21, on lower wage, this somehow not adding to the pensions crisis?

Talk is cheap; it's very easy to demand national service, but the practicalities are never thought of. Respect isn't taught through the military.

Doesn't have to be a full time gig either 777 . . . . many folks work part-time giving back to the community and their country. Only the selfish think they give back by "getting a good education and good job".  sarcastic 
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
tz757300
Posts: 2724
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 6:21 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:47 am

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 24):
many folks work part-time giving back to the community and their country.

i.e. National Guard and Reserves
LETS GO MOUNTAINEERS!
 
GDB
Posts: 12652
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:51 am

In the last year, the Army at least, has seen an 11% increase in recruitment.
The professional forces of the past 45 years, has had peaks and troughs in recruitment, the long, slow, grind of Northern Ireland seemed not to be a big factor from 1969 onwards.

While in the more 24/7 media soaked age of today, casualties in Iraq, Afghanistan, seem so much more controversial, I think there is a collective memory lapse going on here, the early years of N.I. which were very violent, had on average higher military casualties than the last 4 years in the Mid East and Afghanistan.
Some say, 'ah, but today, these are wars of choice', but arguably so was Northern Ireland, it was the only choice with hindsight, but that is not how many saw it then.

In fact, since 1945, only 1968 has seen no British forces in action somewhere. Some died in conflicts not well known at the time, hardly known at all now.
Whatever the occasional recruitment problems, the armed forces have no desire to have any kind of conscription back, in any case, they have not the weapons, uniforms, equipment in general, barracks, anything really, to equip them.

Without completely wrecking the already struggling re-equipment programmes, only a very large increase in defence spending (and taxes), could produce a viable conscript military. Today, for the past few years in fact, the current 2.5% of GDP spent on defence, is the highest for nearly 20 years.
To maintain a (largely not very modern equipped) large conscript force, in the early 50's, it took some 6% of GDP.
This peaked for the Korean War, it caused a crisis inside the then Labour Government, as charges were levied on some of the NHS treatments only recently introduced, ministerial resignations followed, then defeat at the 1951 election.
Also having serious skills and material shortages for industry still struggling to recover from WW2.

Today, equipping the forces is relatively much more expensive now.
Ever wondered why the RAF/Fleet Air Arm of the period of the 50's, was so often behind in modern aircraft compared to the US?

Not that National Servicemen were bad as soldiers, many served with great distinction, in Malaya in the 50's, one Northern regiment mostly made up of conscripts, became particularly feared by the insurgents. And this was tough jungle warfare.
And yet, there was great discontent, many just twiddling their thumbs, a wide refusal of recently de-mobbed conscripts to being called up as the Suez Crisis blew up in 1956.
This was a particularly controversial war, perhaps the first modern one politically.
Don't think that this was not noticed by the chiefs of staff.

Many national service sailors, with little to do, were billeted on obsolete, not fully operational WW2 aircraft carriers, at least one vessel was scrapped early due to vandalism damage by disgruntled conscripts, stuck on this great floating slum.
This was in the early 50's, when we are now told, the youth was obedient and deferential compared to today.
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:48 am

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 24):

Of course they can, and they can also let their ignorance show through - in a lot of cases, quite brightly.

Any example?

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 24):

Doesn't have to be a full time gig either 777 . . . . many folks work part-time giving back to the community and their country. Only the selfish think they give back by "getting a good education and good job". sarcastic

So society would be better off if less people got a good education and a good job? You really need to think a little before you write.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
tz757300
Posts: 2724
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 6:21 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:53 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 27):
So society would be better off if less people got a good education and a good job?

Wow, he never said that. Quite the generalization you made. I believe that he was referring to that people who only think that giving back is getting an education and getting a good job are selfish. Giving back in other ways is certainly a lot more respectful and not selfish because usually, anyone who gets an education and a job, even out of high school gives back...in taxes. You really arn't doing an actual service except working for money. Joining anything else gives back a whole lot more than tax revenue.
LETS GO MOUNTAINEERS!
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:55 am

Quoting TZ757300 (Reply 28):
Wow, he never said that.

Yes, he did. He said, quite clearly, that national service allows people to give back more to society than getting a good education and a good job.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
tz757300
Posts: 2724
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 6:21 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:58 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 29):
Yes, he did.

Maybe he said something like that, but I'm very sure that it was his intent. So tell me besides making the economy go round, what else does getting a good education and good job give back to the country?
LETS GO MOUNTAINEERS!
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 11, 2007 4:02 am

Quoting TZ757300 (Reply 30):
So tell me besides making the economy go round, what else does getting a good education and good job give back to the country?

Making the economy go round is critical. It generates the wealth and taxes to fund things like the military derive from that wealth. It's no co-incidence that the richest country on the planet is also the most powerful.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 11, 2007 4:14 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 27):
Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 24):

Doesn't have to be a full time gig either 777 . . . . many folks work part-time giving back to the community and their country. Only the selfish think they give back by "getting a good education and good job". sarcastic

So society would be better off if less people got a good education and a good job? You really need to think a little before you write.

 sarcastic 

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 29):
Quoting TZ757300 (Reply 28):
Wow, he never said that.

Yes, he did. He said, quite clearly, that national service allows people to give back more to society than getting a good education and a good job.

Not at all what I said . . . . of course. But hey, believe what you want - you do anyway.

TZ quite clearly spelled it out. Go reread his post - a dozen times or so . . . .
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 11, 2007 4:21 am

In which case, I refer you to this:

Quoting Banco (Reply 31):

Making the economy go round is critical. It generates the wealth and taxes to fund things like the military derive from that wealth. It's no co-incidence that the richest country on the planet is also the most powerful.

The economy drives everything in a country, absolutely everything. To suggest that for some people some sort of state-mandated community service (a strage idea coming from someone on the right wing!) is better for the country than that person getting a good education and a good job is naive.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
GDB
Posts: 12652
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 11, 2007 6:53 am

There is too, the issue of different societies.
It has long been the norm in continental Europe, to have large standing conscript forces, all those invasions, wars.
Which Pax Britannia, after 1815, kept out of for 100 years.
When the UK was in, big time, a continental war, conscription was a temporary, reluctant, return.

The US is a bit different, having long had the idea of drafting a militia, as it was once called, ingrained. Even after 1812, though the US would not be heavily involved in overseas wars, until the 20th century, full time from the mid 20thC.

Many outside the UK will be surprised by this, but the British are fundamentally not a militaristic society.
Since for most of the time, most of the population have little direct contact with the military, what's the force level now? About 250-300,000? Out of 61 million.
Even the reservists, mostly part timers, have never been large, never topping much more than 50-60,000.

Little in politics either, you hear a lot recently about the almost total lack of direct military experience in elected politicians, but 45 years after the last of conscription, what else is likely?
No good comparing today with, for example, the Wilson government 40 years ago, where many, most even, of them had been in uniform in WW2, the then Defence Secretary, had been a veteran of the bloody landings in Italy.

Same after WW1, in fact some veterans of WW1 were in politics well into the 1960's, PM Harold Macmillan had been wounded and decorated in 1915.

There is virtually no military input into the political life, any suggestion of this is treated with grave suspicion in fact.

The US has a very strong military lobby, since the 1950's, the huge military/industrial complex.
No real UK version of this, companies may lobby (as with BAE recently), but these events stick out due to their rarity.
 
1stfl94
Posts: 1082
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:33 am

RE: Re-introduce National Service?

Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:23 am

Bringing back national service is one of those ideas that is mentioned by egocentric TV people whenever there's a talk about anti social behaviour. Britain hasn't had national service for 45 years now and for good reason. We need a professional army, people who can be trained in highly skilled tasks and who will stay for more than just a year. The only nations in Western Europe that have kept national service are the smaller nations where they don't have the populations to sustain a large professional army (Switzlerland, Austria, Nordic States). Even the German Army are trying to get out of conscripiting people by having quotas of the numbers of conscipts they will take each year.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aantunes, Baidu [Spider], fr8mech, LittleFokker and 3 guests